After VirtueEdit
After Virtue, the 1981 work by philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, is widely read as a diagnosis of moral disarray in the modern world and as a program for restoring shared norms through the renewal of virtue ethics. MacIntyre argues that the ascendancy of Enlightenment ideals prescribing rational autonomy and universal rights coincided with a collapse in the usable grammar of moral discussion. Rather than a single, objective code, we are left with competing vocabularies—emotions, rival claims, and shifting fashions of legitimacy—that erode public life. The cure, he contends, is to recover the intelligibility of moral conduct by rooting it in long-standing traditions, practices, and communities. After Virtue Alasdair MacIntyre Virtue ethics Emotivism Moral relativism
From a tradition-minded, order-preserving vantage, the book speaks to concerns about social stability, family formation, and the durability of civil society. The argument urges that public life cannot be governed solely by individual preferences or abstract rights; it requires shared purposes forged within communities capable of transmitting virtue from one generation to the next. Critics on the left have described the approach as nostalgic or exclusionary, but proponents view it as a necessary counterweight to moral fragmentation and to movements that treat morality as a matter of surface attitudes rather than rooted commitments. Conservatism Civil society Family
This article surveys MacIntyre’s core claims, the terms he uses to organize them, and the debates they provoked in intellectual circles and public life. The discussion centers on his notions of practice, virtue, and the telos of human life, and on how these ideas translate into judgments about education, law, and culture. Practice (philosophy) Virtue ethics Telos Alasdair MacIntyre
Core ideas
The diagnosis: the collapse of moral language in the modern era
MacIntyre traces a shift from tradition-bound moral reasoning to a fragmentary discourse in which moral statements function more as expressions of stance than claims to truth. This move, he argues, undermines accountability and the possibility of moral progress. The book situates this shift within a longer historical arc—from the unity of ethics with religion and communal life to a plural, competitive marketplace of rival vocabularies. Emotivism Moral relativism Tradition
Practice, virtue, and the goods internal to activities
At the center of MacIntyre’s account is the idea that practices are complex, cooperative activities with standards, standards that generate goods internal to the practice itself. Engagement in a practice strengthens character and fosters virtues appropriate to the role one plays within a tradition. The distinction between internal goods (the excellence specific to the practice) and external goods (wealth, status, power) is meant to explain how virtue is cultivated and what temptations threaten it. This framework leans on the long arc of Aristotle and later medieval and scholastic thought, and it interacts with the modern reconfiguration of public life. Aristotle Virtue ethics Practice (philosophy)
The unity of a life and the social order
MacIntyre argues that meaningful moral evaluation presupposes a narrative unity—the idea that a person’s life can be read as a coherent story of character development within a tradition. Public virtue, then, is inseparable from the communities that sustain that narrative over time. This emphasis on community and tradition is meant to recover a sense of moral direction that can guide institutions, education, and law. Narrative identity (as a closely related idea) Tradition Community
The telos of moral life and the critique of relativism
A central claim is that moral discourse presupposes certain ends or purposes—what the life of a community is aiming toward. When these ends drift or vanish, moral language loses its force. Critics argue about whether such a telos can be universal in a plural society, but advocates contend that shared ends emerge from shared human life and practice, not from mere individual preference. Telos Moral philosophy Relativism
Religion, tradition, and public life
MacIntyre’s framework has roots in Christian moral thought and, more broadly, in classical natural-law traditions. He does not claim infallibility for any one faith, but he does assert that religious and philosophical traditions have historically supplied the vocabularies and authorities that sustain virtuous conduct. In plural modern states, this raises questions about the place of religious authority in public life and the protection of plural rights within a common framework of virtue. Christianity Natural law Religious liberty
Controversies and debates
Liberal and secular criticisms
Liberal critics say that MacIntyre overestimates the cohesion of premodern communities and underestimates the dangers of coercive traditionalism. They worry that privileging a particular set of traditions could suppress dissent, minority rights, and individual autonomy. In plural democracies, they argue, public authority should be justified by universal civil rights and public reason accessible to all. Liberalism Public reason Civil rights
Conservative or traditionalist responses
From a more conservative angle, supporters contend that the book offers a necessary corrective to modernity’s abstract moralism and to the atomization of contemporary life. They see value in reinforcing civic virtue, family responsibilities, and local institutions as bulwarks against nihilism and social decay. They also argue that MacIntyre’s emphasis on practice and tradition helps explain why law and policy should respect historical norms that have sustained social cooperation. Civic virtue Family
The challenge of pluralism and rights
A frequent critique is that any attempt to reconstruct a shared moral framework risks coercing among divergent groups. Proponents of robust minority protections argue for a secular, rights-centered ground that can accommodate diverse cultures without requiring a single, canonical teleology. This tension remains a central debate in discussions of education, public symbols, and the fairness of law. Pluralism Rights Education
The “woke” critique and its rebuttal
Some contemporary critics argue that MacIntyre’s program is insufficient to address injustices of exclusion and inequality tied to race, gender, and identity. They claim that without explicit attention to structural power and historical grievance, virtue-based ethics can become another form of social conformity. From a traditionalist vantage, supporters reply that virtue and character formation are foundational for resisting moral relativism, while acknowledging that any public doctrine must be tested by its regard for all members of society. They contend that in practice, the opposition’s emphasis on status-based identity can itself fracture social solidarity and undermine the common good. In this view, critiques labeled as “woke” sometimes overstate the novelty of social critique and overlook the enduring value of stable mores, while sometimes misapprehending what MacIntyre means by tradition and community. Woke Social justice Identity politics
Influence and legacy
The revival of virtue ethics and communitarian thought
After Virtue contributed to a broad revival of virtue ethics and to the development of communitarian arguments that emphasize society’s role in shaping character. This lineage informs discussions about moral education, civic life, and institutional reform. Virtue ethics Communitarianism Education
Education, law, and public life
The book’s insistence on the formation of character within communities has influenced debates about how schools should educate for virtue, how courts should interpret moral claims, and how cultural institutions should transmit shared norms. The emphasis on practice and tradition still informs contemporary discussions about public virtue and the capacity of institutions to sustain a coherent moral order. Education Law Public life
Debates about tradition and modernity
MacIntyre’s project remains a touchstone in debates about how to balance respect for tradition with the practical demands of a diverse, modern society. The conversation continues in discussions of religion in the public square, the role of family and local associations, and the limits of liberal individualism in maintaining social coherence. Tradition Modernity Public square