larger view

Part 2 Continued below 

Ushering in MacIntyre's Notions of Political Transformation in Modernity

By Richard Poirier

The following is an address presented at the Alasdair MacIntyre's Revolutionary Aristotelianism: Ethics, Resistance and Utopia conference at London Metropolitan University June 29 to July 1, 2007.

Part 2 Continued . . . . . . . . . 

The benefit is instructing or reminding individuals that their duty to themselves is to make choices that are in their best interest. To promote a public discussion of what constitutes one's best interest would indeed be beneficial to both individuals and the public good. A discussion of one's best interest entail a discussion of what constitutes the good and any public discussion of the good is good. An issue which is often misunderstood by some traditions is the nature of the justification of any moral code from an individualist premise. The argument might run that Adam Smith's appeal to 'sympathy' or the counsel of 'the man within the breast' to be morally just or Kant's 'categorical imperatives' provides no reason for why one should subordinate one's apparent self-interest to the dictates of impartial moral rules. The presupposition of this dilemma is the assumption that individualism only constitutes a view of self-interested immediacy. All actions need to be considered in light of a sufficient context and the fact that life is a continuum. What may appear to be a benefit today or at the moment may have long term detriments. Therefore, self-interest needs to always be considered in the light that others exist in our world and our actions often have an effect on others. Which is not to say that we should put the interest of others before ourselves as a primary objective, rather that one should be aware of the interest of others and that their interest should be taken into account when one makes decisions about their own interest. I, therefore, introduce perhaps a new way of understanding individualism in what I call 'Cooperative Individualism' to bridge the gap between those who think individualism is incompatible with the public good.

The danger of the state defining what constitutes the public good is of course it misusing its definition to justify a road to totalitarian rule, as in George Orwell's examples of "newspeak, doublethink" in 1984 (Orwell 1949: 25) or in Josef Pieper's warning of manipulation and "indifference regarding the truth" in his excellent book Abuse of Language -- Abuse of Power (Pieper 1974 /1992: 17). I mention these ideas as examples of the type of fruitful debate that can occur as one possibility of MacIntyre's Revolutionary Aristotelianism taking root in public debate. Through engagement in serious public debate of the notions of liberalism in the modern state contrasted with Aristotle's reasonable approach to ethics of moderation and his doctrine of the 'Golden Mean' in the Nicomachean Ethics, (Aristotle 384-322 BCE), society will have a much greater chance of coming to more of a general consensus of what constitutes the good than if people are unwilling to discuss issues because they believe achieving consensus is hopeless or that there is no value in considering opposing points of view. I have every reason to believe that individuals and the society they comprise would benefit from the insight of Aristotle, Aquinas and MacIntyre. Now on to how to promote their ideas into the mainstream of society.

Ushering in MacIntyre's Notions of Political Transformation

There are several ways to introduce new ideas into society in such a way as to have a real transformational effect. Due to the many different classifications of people that make up society, one approach or method will not be sufficient. It is necessary to use the appropriate method for each different social group. Sophisticated technical philosophy books are excellent in communicating to academic audiences and public intellectuals. But, it is also necessary to influence those in society who influence others, namely those who influence the content of major newspapers, television and radio newsrooms and television programming departments as well as internet sites and the new communication transmitters of our time, the bloggers. Ideas can be posted on newspapers' websites and social networks sites such as MySpace.com and other similar sites that attract millions of teenagers. One of the most powerful communication modes today is the song and accompanying music video. Just as drummer/composer Neil Peart in 1976 incorporated ideas of Ayn Rand (Rand 1961) into the lyrics of Canadian rock band Rush, and Christian orientated bands have done the same with their songs, artists could be encouraged to incorporate Aristotelian concepts into their lyrics.

Television and film writers could be encouraged to incorporate Aristotelian themes into their screenplays. An effective device in politics today is creating non-profit 501(c)(3) businesses and producing videos that articulate the concept of the non-profit for public consumption in various outlets. Cable television offer low-cost production and on-air exposure to small and large markets. Conferences of this kind are excellent to communicate awareness of Aristotle's philosophy and MacIntyre tremendous contribution to this tradition. However, conferences also provide a topic or theme that constitutes a separate element that can be the subject matter of a publicity campaign which can be promoted in numerous ways to reach different audiences.

Books about Aristotle and MacIntrye could be donated to schools for the purpose of students reading them and writing papers about what they read for the purpose of winning a contest or scholarship. A speaker's bureau could be established in which speakers make themselves available to speak at numerous kinds of events from small club luncheons to major talk shows. Merchandizing items such as tee-shirts, posters, coffee mugs, etc., could be sold to raise money for other promotional ideas. Political speechwriters could be persuaded to incorporate ideas into political speeches, and even though this could be risky because a politician's subsequence acts may be contrary to the ideas promoted in their speech creating confusion in the minds of the public. Nonetheless, even controversy itself can generate benefits in exposing good ideas to the masses. Ultimately, candidates associated with these ideas may be elected to office and implement some of these ideas into public practice. There is no limit to the possibility of how a worthy idea can take hold on society once a little momentum has got underway. I have argued that the public is extremely unhappy and looking for relief from their fears and anger. Although they are rightfully skeptical of new ideas from anyone, they are also hungry for leadership and a new direction. The time is now.

Now, one may ask how MacIntyre feels about the prospects of his ideas taking hold in society? Based on my conversation with him on November 30, 2006 at a conference on Modernity at Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture, I would say he is not very optimistic that his ideas will take hold on a large scale level due to the very nature of the modern liberal state. It is my impression that he feels that more good can be accomplished on a small scale community basis where the complexities of the bureaucracy of the state are not as pervasive. So, one might ask why I see possibilities that he does not. My answer is first that I am an optimist, and second that I am reminded of something that MacIntyre said about Adam Smith 31 years ago. He said that there is a passage, seldom noted, in The Wealth of Nations (Smith 1776/1952) in which Smith says that it is more impossible for the system of economy that he is describing to ever actually be instituted in England than the laws of utopia should be enacted. He thought he was describing an imaginary, but possible world, which would not actually materialize. The reason that it would not materialize is that it would conflict with the interest of too many rich and powerful people. Well, notwithstanding Smith's lack of optimism on the prospects of his economic theory of capitalism flourishing, it has indeed flourished and not conflicted with the interest of rich and powerful people. And, so I conclude by theorizing that the same may be true for Alasdair MacIntyre's Aristotelian notions of political and ethical transformations in modernity. Today's conference may indeed be an indicator of a mass transformation looming in the near distance.

#

Bibliography

American Lawyer (July 2003) , The AM 100

Aristotle (384 - 322 BC/1952) , Nicomachean Ethics, Chicago

Callahan, David (2004) , The Cheating Culture, Hardcourt, Orlando, FL

Knight, Kelvin (2007) , Aristotelian Philosophy, Cambridge, UK

Lutz, Christopher (2004) , Tradition In The Ethics of Alasdair MacIntyre, Lanham,

MacIntyre, Alasdair (April 1976) , Morals, Politics and the Emergence of Modernity. Richard Poirier's notes from course lectures by Alasdair MacIntyre, Boston University

MacIntyre, Alasdair (1990) , The Privatization of Good, An Inaugural Lecture in: The Review of Politics, University of Notre Dame, Summer 1990, p 360

MacIntyre, Alasdair (1981 / 1984) , After Virtue, London, UK

MacIntyre, Alasdair (2006) , Three perspectives on Marxism: 1953, 1968, 1995 in: Ethics and Politics: Selected Essays, Volume 2, Cambridge, UK

Mills, Wright, C. (1956) , The Power Elite, Oxford, UK

Neustadt, Richard (1960) , Presidential Power, New York

Orwell, George (1949) , 1984, New York

Pieper, Josef (1974 / 1992) , Abuse of Language -- Abuse of Power, Munich / San Francisco

Poirier, Richard (2007) , In Defense of Individuality, unpublished manuscript, Los Angeles

Rand, Ayn (1961) , For The New Intellectual, New York

Smith, Adam (1776/1952) , The Wealth of Nations, Chicago