Mencius and Aquinas thus disagree significantly about whether humans can flourish if
they rely solely on their own resources.
Yearley's constructive interests become clear when he remarks that, on the issue of moral
reorientation, “Mencius and Aquinas present the general outlines of what, to my mind,
are the two most viable positions” (1990, 223). He does not, however, try to decide
between their views. It seems to me that Aquinas has a better appreciation of the human
moral predicament than does Mencius, though of course my view of the matter may be
biased because I was brought up in the same tradition as Augustine and Aquinas. I have
already recorded my conviction that examples of the sort represented by Augustine's
story of the theft of the pears must be accounted for by an adequate moral psychology.
Aquinas is on the right track in trying to grapple with them. I also think Aquinas's
understanding of what John E. Hare (1996) describes as the moral gap between what
morality demands of us and what we are capable of achieving by our own efforts hits the
mark. So I am persuaded that Aquinas has a more realistic grasp of the problems of
human moral failure than Mencius does.
The two examples of constructive comparisons I have discussed are obviously only a tiny
fraction of the comparisons that could be made and might serve constructive purposes.
The possibility for further contributions to the enterprise of constructive comparison in
philosophy of religion are almost limitless.
To conclude: my discussion of the philosophical problems to which religious diversity
gives rise has not been exhaustive. I have not considered the third item on the agenda
Griffiths proposes for comparative philosophy of religion, which is structural analysis of
the kind carried out in books by William A. Christian Sr. (1972, 1987). Nor have I
discussed the way John Rawls (2001) transformed his justice as fairness from a
comprehensive doctrine, which extends beyond the political to include values and virtues
that are in the limit to inform the whole of human life, to a more modest political
conception, whose scope is restricted to political values and virtues, in large measure
because he came to recognize the importance of the fact of reasonable pluralism of
religious and nonreligious comprehensive doctrines in free and democratic societies. And
I have not brought to closure debate on any of the four topics I have considered. There
remains more to be said about the epistemological challenge of religious diversity, about
the justification of religious toleration and about how to understand the concept of
religion. The enterprise of constructive comparison also offers some new directions for
work in philosophy of religion. So religious diversity bestows on philosophers of religion
a large bouquet of exciting issues to ponder.
WORKS CITED
Alston, William P. 1991. Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience.
Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Bayle, Pierre. [1686] 1987. Pierre Bayle's Philosophical Commentary: A Modern
Translation and Critical Interpretation. Trans. Amie G. Tannenbaum. New York: Peter
Lang.
Christian, William A., Sr. 1972. Oppositions of Religious Doctrines: A Study in the Logic
of Dialogue among Religions. New York: Herder and Herder.