/lit/ - Literature

>>20344102
I showed how the retard who thinks he's a neocon and communist is wrong here >>20343878.

This >>20344094 is also a representative statement of MacIntyre's argument in the book. This >>20342617 is a pretty good question. The implications of his historicization are not fully worked out in After Virtue and its compatibility with catholicism hardly touched on.

>It scarcely needs repeating that it is the central thesis of After Virtue that the Aristotelian moral tradition is the best example we possess of a tradition whose adherents are rationally entitled to a high measure of confidence in its epistemological and moral resources. But an historicist defence of Aristotle is bound to strike some sceptical critics as a paradoxical as well as a Quixotic enterprise. For Aristotle himself, as I pointed out in my discussion of his own account of the virtues, was not any kind of historicist, although some notable historicists, including both Vico and Hegel, have been to some greater or lesser degree Aristotelians. To show that there is no paradox here is therefore one more necessary task; but it too can only be accomplished on the larger scale that the successor volume to After Virtue will afford me.

He does indicate that not just virtue but rationality itself is based in practices, the narrative order of human life, and traditions, so it's not like he gives no reason for finding this kind of historicism plausible. But he's covering a lot of ground in this one book, and I haven't read his others yet.