3 ms·
No, I don't believe that. My point is two things. Just as a matter of fact, most modern (Western) moral and political thought is at least influenced by, and in
by Emma_Goldman 8y ago
No, I don't believe that. My point is two things. Just as a matter of fact, most modern (Western) moral and political thought is at least influenced by, and in many cases a conscious secular reworking of, Judeo-Christian beliefs. That is true of a lot of the so-called 'greats', and is true of our political culture more generally. In that sense, we can tranpose pre-modern beliefs into a modern framework, because we have.
The other point is that I don't think there is some kind of special philosophical condition of coherence characteristic of pre-modern, or specifically Aristotelian, philosophy, which has now been irretrievably lost. MacIntyre only thinks that because he
is an Aristoelian.
I personally think the search for an 'objective' basis for morality is philosophically wrongheaded, and that the belief that morality either is objective or entirely meaningless is complete nonsense.
- hacknat 8y agoThanks for clarifying. I agree with you.
- jeffreyrogers 8y agoI like the way you're framing this. Are there any works of moral philosophy that you would recommend?
- Emma_Goldman 8y agoRaymond Geuss, Philosophy and Real Politics Hans Sluga, Politics and the Search for the Common Good Both are very sceptical of the attempt to formulate a general theory of how the world should be in the abstract. They have a different take on political theory. Geuss also recently wrote a brilliant series of intellectual portraits of ten or so figures from the history of moral/political thought, which is extraordinarily incisive, but also very accessible. It's called Changing the Subject: Philosophy from Socrates to Adorno.
- jeffreyrogers 8y agoThanks, those all look interesting. I will check them out.