Mathew A. Foust

In The Problem of Christianity, Josiah Royce describes the case of the traitor as embodying "the exemplary type of moral tragedy" which he will use toward the adumbration of a theory of atonement. Royce describes the redemptive process of the traitor as a "tragic reconciliation, " for his sinful deed can never be undone. Still, the traitor can, with regard to his treason, "bring out of the realm of death a new life that only this very death rendered possible." In this article, it is argued that Royce's use of "death" here is no mere metaphorical flourish. Drawing from The World and the Individual and The Problem of Christianity, it is proposed that for Royce, sin and death are different instances of the same evil. Moreover, it is suggested that Royce's novel and perceptive understanding of the limits of human nature leads him to valuable ways of coping with our finitude, both as individuals and communities.

This essay first describes the distinctively American character of the life and thought of Josiah Royce, conceiving of Royce as equal parts Puritan and pioneer. Next, the author’s recent experience teaching Royce’s philosophy of loyalty in China is discussed, highlighting pedagogical challenges encountered and techniques employed to navigate these hurdles. A summary of Royce’s philosophy of loyalty is given, incorporating examples used in the classroom. It is shown that upon applying Royce’s philosophy of loyalty to real life situations, resonances between classical Chinese (Confucian) and classical American moral philosophies emerge. It is argued that Royce’s philosophy of loyalty cuts across cultural lines, serving as a viable and valuable theoretical resource for negotiating contemporary moral dilemmas, irrespective of geographical location.

Two of Josiah Royce's lectures in Lectures on Modern Idealism concern the work of F. W. J. Schelling, the "poetic seer of splendid metaphysical visions" whom Royce considered "the prince of the romanticists."1 These lectures are titled "The Dialectical Method in Schelling" and "Schelling's Transcendental Idealism." In the former, Royce remarks that "there are two simple ways to avoid all dialectical complications. One is an easy way, viz., not to think at all. The other is a prudent way, viz., not to confess your thoughts."2 But, Royce insists, philosophers (and Schelling, notably) attempt to "confess their contradictions, to live through them, and so, if may be, to get beyond them."3 In his second treatment of ..

In this paper, I accompany William James and Mary Whiton Calkins in the steps each takes toward his or her respective proposal of a moral equivalent of war. I demonstrate the influence of James upon Calkins, suggesting that the two share overlapping formulations of the problem and offer closely related—but significantly different—solutions. I suggest that Calkins's pacifistic proposal is an extension of that of her teacher—a feminist interpretation of his psychological and moral thought as brought to bear on the problem of war. Calkins's brand of pacifism widens the scope of James's “moral equivalent of war” in a way that is consonant with feminist ideals of inclusiveness and social justice. I conclude by commenting on how James's and Calkins's pacifism can continue to be extended fruitfully in contemporary feminist pacifist theory and practice.