English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper focuses on the late seventeenth-century discourse on “pure” or “disinterested love” ( amour pur ,  amour désintéressé ). The central claim is that the mystical writers’ critique against  amour-propre  threatens the system of esteem so that late seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century debates around pure love (the so called “ amour pur  debate” or the “Quietist affair”) cannot be accounted for simply in terms of mysticism; rather, they have a profound impact on the concept of social esteem. The middle term used to link these two aspects (the theological claims and the social questions) is a special theory of cognition defended by the proponents of pure love and strongly opposed by their opponents. The latter argue that the exclusion of self-reflectivity from disinterested love is a dangerous illusion which leads to negative social consequences. Thus, generally speaking, the Quietist affair is linked not only to the history of early modern self and spirituality but also to the forming of modern social values.

Representation, reflection, and self-esteem in the amour pur debate