Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 2
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Mendham, Matthew D. 2007. Kant and the “Distinctively Moral Ought”: A Platonic‐Augustinian Defense, against MacIntyre. The Journal of Religion, Vol. 87, Issue. 4, p. 556.

    Williams, Thomas 2018. The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Ethics.

  • Print publication year: 2004
  • Online publication date: May 2006

10 - Anselm on ethics


There is a real question about whether Anselm developed anything like a systematic ethical theory. Indeed, scholars have sometimes suggested that his treatment of ethical matters consists in little more than recapitulation of ethical principles implicit in Scripture or transmitted to him by Christian thinkers such as Augustine and Boethius. The truth of the matter, however, is quite the opposite. Although it is easy to overlook the systematic nature of Anselm's ethical theorizing, as well as its genuine originality, his contribution to medieval ethical theory is considerable. Admittedly, none of his philosophical or theological works is devoted to the systematic presentation of ethical issues; nor is there much novelty to be found in them at the level of specific ethical principles. Nonetheless, it is possible to extract from his works something that moral philosophers today would recognize as a worked-out ethical theory - one that includes a sophisticated moral metaphysics, moral semantics, and moral psychology.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

The Cambridge Companion to Anselm
  • Online ISBN: 9780511999901
  • Book DOI:
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *