<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with Nussbaum</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/Nussbaum</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'Nussbaum' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 18:38:38 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 18:38:38 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Shakespeare and philosophy</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/71411/Shakespeare%2Dand%2Dphilosophy</link>
		<description> Martha Nussbaum &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e1bd6ffa-c648-4d40-8efd-40dd1b31b444&amp;p=1&quot;&gt;reviews&lt;/a&gt; three recent books on Shakespeare and philosophy.  The essay offers an excellent analysis of love in &lt;em&gt;Antony and Cleopatra&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;Othello&lt;/em&gt;, and an excellent discussion of the interaction between philosophy and literature. From the essay: &lt;em&gt;&quot;To make any contribution worth caring about, a philosopher&apos;s study of Shakespeare should do three things. First and most centrally, it should really do philosophy, and not just allude to familiar philosophical ideas and positions. It should pursue tough questions and come up with something interesting and subtle--rather than just connecting Shakespeare to this or that idea from Philosophy 101. A philosopher reading Shakespeare should wonder, and ponder, in a genuinely philosophical way. Second, it should illuminate the world of the plays, attending closely enough to language and to texture that the interpretation changes the way we see the work, rather than just uses the work as grist for some argumentative mill. And finally, such a study should offer some account of why philosophical thinking needs to turn to Shakespeare&apos;s plays, or to works like them. Why must the philosopher care about these plays? Do they supply to thought something that a straightforward piece of philosophical prose cannot supply, and if so, what?&quot;&lt;/em&gt;

There is some discussion of the piece &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thevalve.org/go/valve/article/nussbaum_on_philosophy_does_shakespeare/&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2008:site.71411</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 18:38:38 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>antony</category>
		<category>art</category>
		<category>bookreview</category>
		<category>cavell</category>
		<category>cleopatra</category>
		<category>criticism</category>
		<category>literary</category>
		<category>literature</category>
		<category>nussbaum</category>
		<category>othello</category>
		<category>philosophy</category>
		<category>review</category>
		<category>shakespeare</category>
		<dc:creator>painquale</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Citizens of the Universe? Maybe.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/66992/Citizens%2Dof%2Dthe%2DUniverse%2DMaybe</link>
		<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;ct=res&amp;cd=1&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fcosmopolitanism%2F&amp;ei=cPdOR6-oNqb0efeH8Y4N&amp;usg=AFQjCNHgOeUkYvq2D_-mtOjOtmyDX13SdA&amp;sig2=g8oP8O7uQ0S2HagiqzZZOA&quot;&gt;Cosmopolitanism &lt;/a&gt;is as &lt;a href=&quot;http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/conversi/cosmo&quot;&gt;old &lt;/a&gt;as the &lt;a href=&quot;http://theagora.info/stoic/&quot;&gt;Stoics&lt;/a&gt;, but it is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9760.00021&quot;&gt;being &lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kant/kant1.htm&quot;&gt;perpetually &lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/archive/newsletters/v97n2/computers/ess.asp&quot;&gt;renewed&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.signandsight.com/features/1603.html&quot;&gt;Ulrich Beck&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/volume25/benhabib_2005.pdf&quot;&gt;Seyla Benhabib&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.soci.niu.edu/~phildept/Kapitan/nussbaum1.html&quot;&gt;Martha Nussbaum&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3402231.html&quot;&gt;Kwame &lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.kwenu.com/bookreview/obaze/kwame_appiah.htm&quot;&gt;Anthony Appiah&lt;/a&gt; weigh in. The Beck article has theses. You know you like theses:

1. Globalisation is anonymous control
2. A new perspective for a different approach to action
3. Only capital is permitted to break the rules
4. We, the consumers, constitute the counter-power
5. Sacrifice autonomy, gain sovereignty
6. A state towards which the nation is indifferent
7. Convert walls into bridges!

Profit! </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2007:site.66992</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:47:07 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>appiah</category>
		<category>beck</category>
		<category>benhabib</category>
		<category>cosmopolitanism</category>
		<category>kant</category>
		<category>nussbaum</category>
		<category>stoics</category>
		<dc:creator>anotherpanacea</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Uncourageous.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/54252/Uncourageous</link>
		<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/nussbaum/&quot;&gt;Martha C. Nussbaum&lt;/a&gt; reviews &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gov.harvard.edu/faculty/hmansfield/&quot;&gt;Harvey C. Mansfield&lt;/a&gt;&apos;s book &lt;em&gt;Manliness&lt;/em&gt; for &lt;em&gt;The New Republic&lt;/em&gt;, and she hands him &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.powells.com/review/2006_06_22.html&quot;&gt;his own ass&lt;/a&gt;.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2006:site.54252</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:27:07 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>feminism</category>
		<category>harveycmansfield</category>
		<category>manliness</category>
		<category>mansfield</category>
		<category>marthacnussbaum</category>
		<category>nussbaum</category>
		<dc:creator>cgc373</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Cosmopolitanism</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/24709/Cosmopolitanism</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.policyreview.org/apr03/harris.html"&gt;&lt;i&gt;The Cosmopolitan Illusion&lt;/i&gt;,&lt;/a&gt; by Lee Harris, is a challenging response to Martha Nussbaum&apos;s inspiring essay, &lt;a href=http://www.phil.uga.edu/faculty/wolf/nussbaum1.htm&gt;&lt;i&gt;Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.  Nussbaum&apos;s essay was the subject of a &lt;a href=http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/13660&gt;previous thread&lt;/a&gt;.  [Via &lt;a href=http://radio.weblogs.com/0108540/&gt;Ye Olde Phart&lt;/a&gt;.]  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.24709</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 11:07:08 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>Cosmopolitanism</category>
		<category>MarthaNussbaum</category>
		<category>Nussbaum</category>
		<category>Patriotism</category>
		<dc:creator>homunculus</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


