Generosity: Virtue in the Civil Society [Paperback]

Tibor R. Machan (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 26, 1998

Machan argues that generosity is an important virtue for citizens of a free society and that it can be cultivated only through freedom.

Editorial Reviews

Review

[T]his commendably concise and readable volume takes important strides toward clarifying the place of a crucial civic virtue. -- Reason, Loren Lomasky

Product Details

• Paperback: 107 pages
• Publisher: Cato Institute (January 26, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 188257754X
• ISBN-13: 978-1882577545
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.9 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 5.6 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,780,067 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • #47 in Books > 4-for-3 Books > Business & Investing > Economics > General

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Generosity as a rational-egoistic virtue, February 4, 1999

By 

John S. Ryan "Scott Ryan" (Cuyahoga Falls, OH) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Generosity: Virtue in the Civil Society (Paperback)

In this lean and meaty volume, libertarian philosopher Tibor Machan both makes a case for generosity as a civic virtue and denies that it can be enjoined by law. Grounding his arguments in a rational-egoistic, natural-law-based "virtue ethic," he presents what may be the best argument yet offered that the virtue of generosity is a constitutive part of a well-lived human life. He then proceeds to demolish the view that generosity may properly, or can be effectively, enforced by a "welfare state."

This work also makes a nice companion to David Kelley's _Unrugged Individualism_, which focuses on the more general virtue of _benevolence_. The Randian camp has not yet made a full case that benevolence and generosity -- which, by nature and definition, aim _directly_ at the well-being of people other than oneself -- are genuinely compatible with rational egoism; Kelley in particular tries to reduce benevolence without remainder merely to further consequences to oneself. But Machan's virtue ethic makes up for a good deal of what Kelley lacks; between the two of them, they've made a tremendous start on a very demanding project.