Research Paper on:
A Common Humanity of Raimond Gaita

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
most fundamental questions of morality and what the collectively agreed-upon frameworks are for such questions demonstrates that he is unwilling to waste time with what others might think of as  something of an unilateralist or inclusive attitude that often shrugs and assumes that it is time to "agree to disagree." The bottomline is that Gaita makes it clear that he  is convinced that a great deal of contemporary moral philosophy is fundamentally and undeniably misguided. The student working on this project and analyzing Gaitas thinking should understand that the  question Gaita asks is whether or not the attitudes that are engendered in concepts such as "you have your values and I have mine" are truly legitimate or even meaningful.  Gaita does not hesitate to present concepts such as "good" and "evil" and does not feel the need to put them into some sort of relativist context. And yet, his  critics would suggest that as a professor or "moral philosophy," it is almost Gaitas obligation to establish a position that could be defined as the moral high ground. But when  one reads his book, it becomes clear that Gaitas own convictions far exceed any need to address, much less please, his critics. Recovering "Serious" Morality Because of Gaitas  clear willingness to address what most would refer to as the "hard issues," it should not come as any surprise that there will be plenty of people in the academic,  philosophical, and even theological communities who will be eager to take exception to his ideas and subsequent writings. Even the fact that his position is that modern practices are undeniably  separated from either true utilitarian or even Kantian precepts supports his idea that it may best serve modern humans to seriously consider the lives of the saints (clearly a suggestion