چکیده:
What you have before you is a report on the valuable and noteworthy points that the contemporary Aristotelian philosopher, Alasdair MacIntyre, has expressed regarding Aristotle's philosophy of ethics and politics in the sixth chapter of the book 'Whose Justice? Which Rationality?'. Additionally, while comparing the views of Aristotle with Plato, he examines and critiques their opinions. Alasdair MacIntyre was born in 1929 into a Scottish family and spent most of his education in England. He first taught in England and currently teaches in America. His importance stems from his critical approach to the prevailing culture in the West, which, among other things, focuses most heavily on critiquing emotivism, utilitarianism, liberalism, and modernism in ethics and politics; to the extent that he is currently considered one of the greatest critics of Western liberalism. Furthermore, he is among the serious defenders of Aristotelianism, which is considered one of the constructive elements of a type of religious ethics; for this reason, from the perspective of the religious, especially Christian, Jewish, and Muslim thinkers, MacIntyre's position in the philosophy of ethics and contemporary political philosophy holds special significance.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Part of this truth that is important for my discussion is to what extent and in what way Aristotle's works on ethics and politics, [address] the problems raised in the Republic is, which stands in opposition to the full spectrum of interpretations; because as I have previously stated, in my view, Aristotle was attempting to complete Plato's work and, to the extent that this completion required it, to correct it.
Where Plato places the ideal government in opposition to the realm of current city-states and emphasizes their differences, Aristotle considers the virtuous city (madina fadila) to be a city-state that conforms to a standard that has already been implicitly and fundamentally realized and confirmed in the political actions of the Greeks of that time.
However, what is reflected in his views was a defense of goods indicating excellence and goods indicating virtues, and especially a justice that was understood through these goods; therefore, Aristotle confirms and proves Plato's project and, in contrast, considers Alexander's project invalid; because Aristotle provides an account of human life that integrates and unifies various specific goods.
The essential point in my argument is that a specific concept of the city-state provided a framework in which Aristotle presented his explanation of justice, practical reason, and the connection between these two; however, this should not cause us to ignore the fact that Aristotle considered the movement of man from potentiality to actuality in the city-state as an instance of the metaphysical and theological characteristics of a perfected universe.
(
, 
, 
)
