After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory

MacIntyre regards Nietzsche as an important philosopher and the defining thinker of the modern post-Enlightenment age. In what ways do Nietzsche and Aristotle differ? Are the two traditions as radically opposed as MacIntyre believes them to be? Why or why not?

Why does MacIntyre believe that the Enlightenment concept of natural rights is a “fiction”? Do you think that the existence of natural rights can be rationally proven? Why or why not?

How does MacIntyre depict the three main “characters”­­­—the aesthete, the bureaucrat, and the therapist—that he associates with modernity? What aspects of modernity do they embody? What other “characters” do you think represent modern society?

MacIntyre emphasizes the importance of context in both understanding philosophical traditions and in exercising of morality. What are some of these contexts? How do they function? Do you agree that philosophy and morality are context-based, or is there such a thing as more “transcendent” and/or universal philosophical and moral values?

Compare and contrast deontological (rule-based) morality with character-centered/teleological morality. What are the strengths and weaknesses of each ethical system? Which do you prefer and why?

MacIntyre argues that morality and philosophy always develop within specific historical and social contexts. In your view, which historical and social contexts are currently shaping modern morality? Which thinkers have the most influence? How and why?

Why does MacIntyre say that humans are essentially “story-telling animal[s]”? What are some of the ways that this love for narrative is expressed in human society and culture?

Consider a counterargument to After Virtue in defense of Enlightenment philosophy and/or modern individualism. What strengths, if any, do Enlightenment philosophy and modern individualism contain? What weaknesses and/or assumptions undermine MacIntyre’s arguments and premises? Can the two traditions be reconciled? Why or why not?