Abstract
The article begins with Aristotle's discussion of phronesis for ethical life, only to discover the absence of a universal dimension. This issue of parochialism as opposed to a kind of universalism is a structural element of this paper. Secondly, Heidegger's ontological interpretation of phronesis creatively transforms phronesis to highlight a tension between ethics and fundamental ontology-a tension overcome in the paper's third section devoted to Ricœur. Thus, Ricoeur's post-critical phronesis is shown to possess a universal dimension while disclosing ontologically. Phronesis responds to the need for universalization to overcome the parochial limitation but also incorporates an ontological disclosive power. Ricœur's post-critical phronesis is a plural, collective, and public argumentation. Phronesis is inventive and productive in resolving conflicts between legitimate universal claims or demands and is ontological.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
