Medicinal Properties of Augustine

Abstract

Medicine cures the sickness of the body, but what is appropriate to remedy the maladies and pains of the soul? Martha Nussbaum, in her book, The Therapy of Desire, responds to this question by arguing that philosophy has the ability to restore health to the soul. What's more, Nussbaum also argues that various Hellenistic schools formulated moral which had precisely this therapeutic objective. She asserts that examples of medical moral philosophies would include the systems of the Epicureans, Stoics, and Skeptics, but Nussbaum precludes the addition of what she calls the Christian from the list of medical moral philosophies. Nussbaum claims that the Augustinian Christian ethic cannot be considered medical because it fails to arise from needs, desires, and aspirations. This paper will undertake to explain why this position should be rethought. In this paper, I will explain why the Augustinian Christian ethic can indeed be considered a medical moral philosophy concerned with producing happiness and a healthy soul. This paper will maintain that the Augustinian Christian ethic satisfies all the common characteristics associated with any medical moral philosophy. Furthermore, this paper will conclude that Nussbaum's primary problem is one of human good, since as Nussbaum asserts, the Augustinian ethic fails to place the locus of the good squarely within being itself. Consequently, she argues, God's will and grace must be considered the locus of the good. This conclusion should be reconsidered, and this paper will show, by way of examining the Augustinian ontology, along with the role of grace in the Augustinian world view, that indeed being and experience are the centers out of which well-being and happiness flows. And so, in the final