Introduction to Alasdair MacIntyre and After Virtue (1)

After Virtue was first published in 1981, but MacIntyre wrote a new preface in 2007 reasserting his full confidence in the arguments. After Virtue promises to take on emotivism and moral relativism generally and to help us navigate not toward moral absolutism but toward moral judgment through a renewal of Aristotelian virtue ethics. This video introduces key themes, including his disagreement with communitarianism, and a bit of the life of MacIntyre--who's still going at 90-- in preparation for a reading of the third edition of After Virtue.

[@cedriclenners3737]

I'm thinking about reading MacIntyre and this video gave me the push to begin!

[@wp6007]

Chris Boyd was influenced by MacIntyre significantly, will you be checking out his upcoming book, Nemesis?

[@jamesduda6017]

So this question is coming from someone who has a very basic understanding of philosophy. The liberal/liberalism we are talking about is in the classical sense right? Not in the current political sence?

[@maurinacademy]

That is correct--classical liberalism, i.e., John Locke, Enlightenment

[@Svankmajer]

Does Alasdair MacIntyre and After Virtue say anything about utilitarianism or negative utilitarianism?

[@maurinacademy]

MacIntyre takes on Benthan, Mill and other Utilitarians in Ch. 6 "Some Consequences of the Failure of the Enlightenment Project." He links it to the development of emotivism. He's highly critical of both.

[@Svankmajer]

@@maurinacademy Thank you so much. I'll check the chapter out for sure... out of curosity - do you agree with him? Why or why not?

[@S2Cents]

Heard of the channel from Justin Murphy

[@tonguemybumb]

thank you for this video.

[@averagejoe225]

7:50 why the hell is any of this necessary to include lmao

[@maurinacademy]

Because the shifting and changing in place and relationship contradicts his philosophical outlook, and that is inherently interesting.

[@averagejoe225]

@@maurinacademy Whether a particular philosopher achieves or fails to sufficiently adhere to the praxis involved with their philosophical work bears in no way on the validity or persuasiveness or anything else regarding the veracity of their writing. If a vegan philosopher, once every few decades, voluntarily engaged in animal consumption, that wouldn't be a meaningful refutation of veganism. MacIntyre having multiple wives doesn't bear on whether his arguments for virtue ethics are correct. Leave the personal affairs out of the discourse and stick to discussing the ideas, because the personal affairs don't bear on the truth-aptness of the arguments.

[@Sunfried1]

For heaven's sake, get to the point!

[@no-one-knows321]

Exclusion issue-I can't just expect to be included into someone's personal space, I need to be asked or welcomed.
This human nature.
And it scales are the way up.

[@RichardCorral]

Damn, this is the most gossipy lecture I've ever heard. Stick to the facts.