/lit/ - Literature

This and Bowling Alone desu.

>>15628063
>contemporary ethics

Is the quagmire of contemporary moral discourse the result of our living in the afterglow of the failure of the totalising tendencies of the enlightenment? Is it the case that in bureaucratically managed modern societies there will periodically emerge social movements informed by an unreflective kind of prophetic irrationalism of which Nietzsche's thought is the ancestor? Is a return to a nuanced, Aristotelian-cum-Thomist account of normative ethics in which we will be better able to specify the context of the virtues urgently needed?

MacIntyre was unironically right about everything. Prove me wrong.

>>12897012
>we are slowly making moral progress
Certainly not.

I love the book so far but find myself not fully understanding every ounce of what is written. What are you specific recommendations for better understanding this book and/or books that are a bit over your head in general.

So far I am loving the book

THIS big brained son of a bitch is fucking solving moral philosophy and basically, you are a fucking emotivist.

How? Read this book.

>>12328984
the problems is socrates (or at least what he embodies)
but yeah, aristotle is the solution, not the problem

>>12324595
I think what you're describing is emotivism. Emotivism is the idea that all moral language is purely an expression of feelings, and they contain no objective or factual reality.

This of course leaves us in a horrible predicament. Contemporary moral discourse is rife with emotivism, and instead of rationally discussing things under a shared framework, we see who can shout the loudest. MacIntyre proposes that the solution to this chaos is to return to modern version of aristotelianism.

So, I think to answer your question. A shared idea of Truth is the only thing which stops humans playing around and outwitting each other, purely to please their desire to dominate others.

> /lit/ what do you think about this book?