ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that the legitimate criticisms of essentialism still leave room for essentialism of a kind: for a historically sensitive account of the most basic human needs and human functions. The contemporary assault on universal accounts of the human being and human functioning is not always accompanied by clear and explicit philosophical arguments. A different objection is pressed by liberal opponents of essentialism; usually these opponents are themselves willing to be essentialist about the central importance of human freedom and autonomy. All human beings face death and, after a certain age, know that they face it. This fact shapes more or less every other element of human life. The opposition charges that any attempt to pick out some elements of human life as more fundamental than others, even without appeal to a transhistorical reality, is bound to be insufficiently respectful of actual historical and cultural differences.
