Bernard Yack reviews a volume on Macintyre’s debt to Marx and concludes that he is not the “revolutionary Aristotelian” he has claimed to be:
His Aristotelianism may be critical, unseasonable, alienated, and anti-hierarchical; it is not really revolutionary. True, MacIntyre would like to transform the character of our social world. But he would have us seek such change through means, tending to the virtues in our local communal gardens, which neither attack nor are prohibited by the powers that be. These means may run counter to the most influential modern ideas about morality. And they may be undermined by the power and rewards of social practices that promise more immediate and tangible forms of gratification. But there is still plenty of room within modern society to cultivate them.
More here . The Marx & Philosophy Review of Books also has a review of a previous edition of the book.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Natural Law Needs Revelation
Natural law theory teaches that God embedded a teleological moral order in the world, such that things…
Letters
Glenn C. Loury makes several points with which I can’t possibly disagree (“Tucker and the Right,” January…
Visiting an Armenian Archbishop in Prison
On February 3, I stood in a poorly lit meeting room in the National Security Services building…
