ABSTRACT
In Love's Knowledge, Martha Nussbaum defends Aristotle's view that it is a mistake to try to understand rationality on a "scientific" model. This chapter considers Nussbaum's remarks on rationality, first, because her treatment of the role of literature in deliberation does indeed challenge traditional conceptions of rationality. Nussbaum may be right in response to Flare that moral philosophy is not best expressed by the image of a being with "superhuman powers of thought, superhuman knowledge and no human weaknesses". The chapter suggests that the role of personal stories in rational deliberation cannot be accounted for without something very like the "scientific" account or the "transcendent" position. Nussbaum's reference to R. M. Hare's Archangel-Prole metaphor for moral deliberation suggests an interesting and fundamental problem with her discussion of individual rationality. In Moral Thinking, Hare introduces the image of the Archangel and the Prole.
