This paper offers a novel, secular account of the virtue of humility. There are only two such accounts in recent philosophical literature: one defended by Julia Driver, the other by George Schueler. Driver attaches the virtue of humility to people who underestimate their merits, or lack beliefs about their merits altogether. Schueler thinks that humility requires indifference to how we are regarded vis-a`-vis our accomplishments. This paper brings out the limitations of those accounts and constructs a new one which is free of them.The new account derives directly from the under-appreciated approach defended a century ago by Hastings Rashdall, who developed a secular (albeit religiously-inspired) account of humility according to which true humility reflects love for one's neighbour. After indicating the flaws in Rashdall's approach, I develop an account based on his intuitions. Specifically, I argue that humility requires suppressing our egos when they lead us to neglect or disregard other duties. Humility comprises two dimensions: a private dimension, for when we uphold self-regarding duties rather than succumb to the temptations of ego; and a public dimension, for when we display fidelity to other-regarding duties at the expense of the pleasures of ego.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to explain the incompatibility of anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) measures as a hasty over-reaction after 9/11, focusing on the compliance burdens that this imposes on the regulated sector, most notably financial institutions. Design/methodology/approach -This paper explains the fundamental differences between money laundering and terrorist financing. It follows the evolution of the marriage between AML and CTF measures in the USA and the UK, comparing the pre and post-9/11 phases. Consequently, the specific legal burdens placed on financial institutions as a result of this marriage are discussed. Findings -The paper, while recognising the importance of targeting terrorist money, contends that inherent differences exist between money laundering and terrorist financing, and fusing them together is a hasty reaction to the 9/11 attacks. It argues that the need of the hour is to focus on terrorist profiling, rather than attempting to target terrorist financing through the AML regime. It also concludes that financial institutions are unfairly burdened with the task of "suspecting" terrorist funds, while receiving little or no guidance in this respect. Originality/value -This paper is of value to governments, regulators, and financial institutions considering the effective implementation of the AML-CTF regime in the UK and the USA.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract