![]() ![]() However, his approach to our potential moral futures suffers from a critical flaw, as he insists on keeping that portion of the discussion entirely secular – a move which betrays his fundamental misreading of both Nietzsche and the direction of Western morality. MacIntyre’s analysis of the advent and consequences of the Enlightenment is excellent. Constitution ultimately does for legal affairs).ġ. This common framework of teleology and theism didn’t eliminate moral debate nor create total moral consensus, but it did provide a shared set of boundaries and standards for the disputations of moral philosophy (just as the U.S. Just as we might define a “good watch” by how well it keeps time, so a “good man” was defined by how well he morally reasoned and developed his virtues. Man’s ultimate end was the fulfillment of the transcendent moral order through the use of his divinely endowed reason. For example, the purpose of a watch is to tell time and the purpose of a knife is to cut. ![]() ![]() The second foundation (an idea of Aristotle which Thomas Aquinas imported to Western Christendom) dictated that all things had a definite end, goal, or purpose they are meant to fulfill. This first foundation prescribed a transcendent moral order that existed independent of whatever man may have thought about it morality was a divine creation, not a human one. Prior to the Enlightenment, the moral theorizing of Western civilization took place within a commonly understood framework erected on two foundations: Judeo-Christian theism and Aristotelian teleology. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |