If autonomous value spheres and cartesian modernity are aimed at, two closely connected ideas are rejected that have been rarely absent in utopias and criticisms of liberalism. The first is the idea that individuals find perfection not by specializing in an activity but by developing all their capabilities. It is the ideal of the universally developed individual. The second is the idea that our life should not be torn apart by incompatible tasks; that we should be one and whole in all our activities and should have a chance of being recognized as a whole person rather than for our extraordinariness in a value sphere. It is the ideal of the whole individual. Both ideals react against the painful experience of being torn up by incompatible demands: of economy and the family, of political and justice considerations, of scientific and religious attitudes. In absolute love, as we have seen, the individual can act as a whole person and receive undivided and unconditional recognition. But this is a way that, though in principle open to everyone, in fact will be open only to a minority. So is it true that Cartesian modernity will not give us a fair chance of acting as whole persons?

No doubt there are tensions between the spheres. But looking closer at them we can see that if they tear individuals up, they do not because the spheres are incompatible but misunderstood.