The Religion & Culture Web Forum

Commentary Footnotes
March 2006, Trading Faces: A Case Study in the Science of Identity, Aesthetics, Ethics:

Imputability, Ascription, Responsibility: Moral Identity and Organ Transplantation

by William Schweiker, University of Chicago

1 The conditions for ascription and imputation of responsibility as well as the means (social/linguistic) and limits on these ways of identifying a responsible agent are of course hotly debated by philosophers and theologians. For my own take on these matters see William Schweiker, Responsibility and Christian Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

2 On this point I have been persuaded by the hermeneutical turn in accounts of subjectivity as found, for instance, in the work of Paul Ricoeur. See his One Self as Another, trans. K. Blamey (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1992).

3 See most recently, Emmanuel Levinas, Humanism of the Other, trans. N. Poller, intro. R. A. Cohen (Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2003).

4 For the use of cultural and religious sources in moral understanding and their importance for advancing a renewed from of humanism in a global context, see William Schweiker, Theological Ethics and Global Dynamics: In the Time of Many Worlds (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2004). Also see Humanity Before God: Contemporary Faces of Jewish, Christian and Islamic Ethics, ed. M. Johnson, K. Jung, and W. Schweiker (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006).

Commentary Footnotes
March 2006, Trading Faces: A Case Study in the Science of Identity, Aesthetics, Ethics:

Transplantation And Restoration

by Brian Soucek, University of Chicago

1 L. Frank Baum, The Tin Woodman of Oz, chap. 2. Online at:

2 Christopher Thomas Scott, interviewed by Terry Gross on Fresh Air from WHYY, 14 February 2006. Online at:

3 Andrew Oddy, “Conservation and Restoration,” Grove Art Online, Oxford University Press,

4 Gregory Currie offers arguments (underappreciated ones, I believe) about the value copies might have even for those who think the meaning and value of a work of art are constituted by the work’s context. His argument suggests that painting and sculpture should be treated more like music and literature, where manuscripts are not (aesthetically) privileged. See Currie, An Ontology of Art (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1989).