لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Section 1
Introduction
Whose Justice? Which Rationality?
by Alasdair MacIntyre,
Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988. 410 pp., index.
This is an important book, a book with which
Muslims, in particular, need to become acquainted. The author, Alasdair
MacIntyre, is one of the most profound and most controversial moralists and
social thinkers of our time. The book, Whose
Justice? Which Rationality?, is not an easy work. It requires some
familiarity with various details of Western culture, in particular its moral
and political philosophies. So, rather than merely summarize the work, I will
try to show why I think it is important for Muslim thinkers to read and
criticize it. For this purpose I begin with a general discussion of the work''s
importance in the context of MacIntyre''s other writings, and then turn to two
of the major topics discussed in the work, relativism and liberalism. Finally,
I offer some humble criticisms of my own, and suggestions for further research.
Of all those who have stood against the currents of
modernism, Alasdair MacIntyre stands out as the philosopher who has offered the
most profound critique. His After Virtue,
which was first published in 1981, sent shock waves through the Western
intellectual world. [1] He committed what for many was an unforgivable sin when
he claimed that the project of the Enlightenment period of European thought was
a failure. This rejection of modernist thinking was focused upon moral
philosophy, but it attracted the attention of a readership much wider than what
could be expected for a book in ethics. There were even articles in the popular
press about the revival of Aristotelian thought initiated by MacIntyre''s work,
and in the article on the history of twentieth century Anglo‑American
Ethics in the Encyclopedia of Ethics, Alan
Donagan predicts that MacIntyre''s attention to Thomistic thought will influence
the philosophical work to be done in the twenty‑fast century. [2]
MacIntyre''s work has also sparked controversy among
political theorists and social critics, as well as professional philosophers.
[3] Conferences have been convened to discuss his ideas, critical studies of
his work have been compiled, and several of his books and articles have been
translated into foreign languages.
In the field of ethics, MacIntyre has spawned a
revival of interest in Aristotelian ethics with such force that it is now
generally recognized as a serious rival to the two major strands of moral
philosophy that have been dominant in the West since the Enlightenment:
untilitarianism and Kantianism. Numerous books and articles have been written
since the publication of After Virtue proclaiming
the advantages of an Aristotelian virtue ethics over utilitarian
consequentialism and Kantian deontology.
In political theory, there has been a steady stream
of writings in which liberalism is defended against MacIntyres criticisms, or
those criticisms are elaborated, often in the form of a communitarian theory
which MacIntyre himself has repudiated. [4]
In religious thought, MacIntyre''s work has prompted
a renewed interest in Neo‑Thomism, especially as it is related to ethics
and social political thought.
MacIntyre''s emphasis on the importance of history
has also led to heated discussions in which he has often been accused of being
a relativist. It was largely in respopse to this sort of misunderstanding which
followed the publication of After Virtue that
MacIntyre was motivated to write the sequel, Whose Justice? Which Rationality? MacIntyre''s rejections of
historicism and relativism in this latter work have also contributed to the
depth of the discussions of these issues.
So, one reason for reading MacIntyre is because his
work has been tremendously influential, even among those who disagree with his
positions. Another reason would be interest in the topics he discusses:
history, politics, ethics, religion, epistemology, philosophy in general and
the relations among them. For Muslims, however, there are additional reasons to
read MacIntyre. One of the most important issues in Islamic social and
political thought since the nineteenth century has been the confrontation of
traditional Muslim societies with European modernism, and one of the most
important facets of modernism about which Muslim thinkers are concerned is that
of political liberalism. Muslims who argue that liberal ideals and institutions
are compatible with Islam are usually classified as modernists. At the other
extreme are those who would claim that liberal and Islamic thought agree on
nothing. The vast majority of Muslim intellectuals and scholars, however, fall
somewhere between these extremes. The interesting discussion in contemporary
Muslim social thought is not over whether modernists or conservatives hold a
more defensible position, but what aspects of liberal thought may be
accommodated and what aspects must be rejected. MacIntyre''s writings are
interesting in this context because, like many Muslims, he is very strongly
opposed to many aspects of modernism and liberalism for what turn out to be
ultimately religious reasons. Furthermore, the philosophical perspective he
seeks to defend, a form of Neo Thomism with a strong emphasis on Aristotle, is
more similar to the philosophical perspective of traditional Islamic thought
than are any of the other major tendencies to be found among contemporary
Western philosophers.
Of course, there remain important differences
between the attitudes of Muslims and those expressed by MacIntyre, to be
discussed below, but regardless of our differences, the thought of the most profound
critic of modernism and liberalism in the West should be of great interest to
those who feel a need to resist the imposition of modernist and liberal thought
on Muslim societies, such as those inspired by the warnings of the Grand Leader
of the Islamic Revolution against the cultural invasion.'' Muslim liberals who
await a repetition of the European Enlightenment in Islamic culture would also
be well advised to read MacIntyre, who has declared the Enlightenment project
to be a failure and ultimately incoherent. Perhaps if Muslim modernists would
read MacIntyre they would become more critical of the claims made on behalf of
liberalism, and would come to recognize the need to examine the intellectual
history of their own traditions, as well as those of the West, to find the way
forward. Perhaps MacIntyre''s books can serve as a kind of vaccination against
the infatuation with Western culture which Persians call gharbzadigi.
After Vitue
The book which initially provoked the great storm of
controversy was After Virtue, and in
order to understand the true significance of Whose Justice? Which Rationality? one must understand something
about the earlier work.
After Virtue begins with the disquieting
suggestion that moral discourse in the West has lost its meaning, that it
serves as a disguise for the expression of preferences, attempts to gain power,
emotions and attitudes, but that it has ceased to have any relation to what is
truly good or right. MacIntyre pins responsibility for the collapse of Western ethics
on the Enlightenment. Much of the book goes on to criticize various aspect of
Enlightenment thought in Hume, Kant, the Utilitarians, the emotivists, and in
contemporary liberal political philosophy, especially as elaborated by John
Rawls. [5] MacIntyre sees only two ways to pass beyond the errors of modernism
and liberalism: either we must accept a Nietzschean nihilism or we must return
to an Aristotelian ethics. However, the Aristotelian alternative is not a
simple return to Greek or medieval systems of thought. For the Enlightenment
criticisms of scholasticism to be successfully answered, the return must be to
a reformed Aristotelianism consonant with modern science. This means that the telos or end of man is not to be
understood as determined by biology, rather it is to be fathomed by reflection
on history, and the human practices and traditions that have evolved over the
course of history. The second half of After
Virtue consists in MacIntyre''s elaboration of this historically grounded
Aristotelianism and its development as a theory of the virtues.
Notes:
[1]. Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 2nd edition (Notre Dame:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1984). The translation of this work into Farsi
by Mr. Shomali and Mr. Shahriari is near completion. A lengthy serialized
review by the translators continues to appear in Ma''rifat. The translation of Whose Justice? Which Rationality? into Farsi is being undertaken by
Mr. Mustafa Malikiyan.
[2]. Lawrence Becker, ed. Encyclopedia of Ethics (New York: Garland, 1992), p. 543.
[3]. See Peter McMylor, Alasdair MacIntyre: Critic of Modernity (London: Routledge, 1994),
and After MacIntyre: Critical
Perspectives on the Work of Alasdair MacIntyre, ed., John Horton and Susan
Mendus (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994).
[4]. Communitarians emphasize the importance of
reference to one''s community in accounts of the self, moral agency and
practical reasoning; and they advocate a politics designed to nourish the
community and its values at the expense of individual autonomy and liberal rights.
More will be said about MacIntyre''s rejection of communitarianism later in this
review.
[5]. The most important defense of political
liberalism in the twentieth century is Harvard prefssor John Rawls''. A Theory of Justice (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1971).
