Alasdair Macintyre: The Argument Of Moral Individualism

Good Essays
The argument of moral individualism is flawed because it claims that one can have loyalty to a community without accepting that there are obligations that do not require consent. Michael Sandel, by appealing to Alasdair Macintyre’s ideas of the conception of self and Virtue Ethics, proves that to have special loyalties to family and community members, one must accept obligations of solidarity.
Moral individualism rests on the conception that the only actions one is accountable for are the ones that have voluntarily incurred. This is because we are independent humans in society not liable for the actions of others. But, moral individualism is not justifiable to apply to society; I agree with Michael Sanders. There is no sense of loyalty without acceptation of a collective identity with which an obligation to
…show more content…
This relates back to Sandel and MacIntyre’s narrative perspective and the idea that communities shape who we are throughout time.
Sandel states: “with belonging comes responsibility.” He “does not think the freedom of choice – even freedom of choice under fair conditions – is an adequate basis for a just society.” For example, a country cannot exist that has politics separated from moral debates because of the claims of solidarity such as public apologies and pride or shame in one’s country. Promises of unity and membership means that there are specific responsibilities, along with the rights, that come from being a part of a society that apply to all members. As well as there is an owing to those in the association that are a part of its history. An example exemplifying the need for obligations of solidarity would be that it may be inconvenient to have apologize for actions of your countries past even though you were not personally a part of them. But, as a person who wants to be virtuous, patriotic and of good moral character, one needs to accept the good and the bad of their collective group. One

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Moral Obligation Essay

    • 897 Words
    • 4 Pages

    So, in order for state acts to be accepted, the laws must be just and fair. Meaning that, you must live within a state with a rule of law or you will have no possibility of justice. From this, Nager takes away the idea that it is important to improve and support your own country. Thus, you don’t owe anyone anything outside of your state. I agree that it is important to help the people around you, in order to better your state.…

    • 897 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Kant believes it should be a requirement for us to obey the moral law because it is a noble thing to do. Kant does not believe in lying or doing evil, but he does believe in good will. Even if lying will help save a person’s life, Kant still insists that you should not lie because he believes that both a good lie and a bad lie should be prohibited. Kant deals with deontological ethics which is based on ethics out of a sense of duty or obligation. When it comes to good will we are to recognize what our duty is in life, we are to complete that duty, and we must be willing to do what is right no matter the situation.…

    • 1804 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Divine Command Theory

    • 840 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This view states that “moral standards are relative to cultures or societies.” (Shafer-Landau, 293) I like this view because I believe that people should be able to live their lives according to their own moral standards. Cultural groups and societies should be able to dictate what is good and what is bad on their own. A moral code should not have to be validated by a god, people can be the authors of morality. The views of Cultural Relativism are very similar to sovereignty. Living in a world filled with many cultures it would be impossible to create one uniform moral code that could be accepted by everyone.…

    • 840 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This model requires that citizens and responsible institutions share the same principles of justice, free of self-interest. Moreover, it is imperative that Institutions guarantee these liberties and that they be considered to be doing so, by citizens. This condition requires the formation of a new social contract, with an alternative definition of social justice, based on the moral and fair principles of what free, rational people of equal social standing would agree to, for social cooperation. However, it is difficult to enter into such negotiations between peers, who have either been spared and are therefore blind to the injustices suffered by others or who, on the other hand, have been treated unfairly and are envious of their wealthier colleagues. In order to establish this objective, otherwise known as “fair equal opportunity”, John Rawls requires that we enter into a hypothetical scenario, forgetting our position in society and all current knowledge of economic and political matters.…

    • 988 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This implies the benefactor and beneficiary are, from a democratic perspective, equals. Both believed in preserving the dignity, respect and freedom of choice while striving to improve society as a whole. Again, Sumner and Addams believe this for completely different reasons. Sumner, although he believed in Social Darwinism to a certain extent, he still believed in the successful helping the less successful, but only through a social contract where both are on equal terms, not through obligation or duty. Sumner also believed humans were meant to be confronted with adversity and challenges, but this did not mean that any one person or group should provide for another person or group, but each needs to provide some contribution to the whole.…

    • 1397 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    With this, people are responsible for themselves and consequently about the society in which they live. Thereby, avoiding people to think about their own good as a selfish center of their actions, to seen the common good that derived from personal responsibility. I do agree with Kant that this is why we should treat persons ethically. Treating “humanity” as an end in itself implies that “humanity” is the limiting condition of our actions. This means we can do anything as long as we respect the “humanity” that every person represents.…

    • 821 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Limited deviations are allowed for the purpose of respect for cultural differences, but not as a tool for any government to disregard human rights. Lastly, it is inaccurate to claim incompatibility between the teachings of Confucius and human rights since the ethics of this traditional school of thought reflects humanism. Virtues of benevolence and filial piety should not be appreciated as a denial of individual rights. There is a set of fundamental human rights which are universal in nature and it is the government’s responsibility to safeguard and promote human rights in order to ensure its people can enjoy a life of…

    • 971 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Immanuel Kant’s ethics is all about good will and following your duties. He believes that we need to have the right motives and if we do, then it is good. For example, we should be loyal to people, but if you are being loyal to an evil person, then that is not good. If you are being loyal to a good person, someone who has a goodwill then that is following your duty. Having a goodwill is unique in that the fact that is is always deemed moral and right, even if it fails to achieve its intentions.…

    • 1590 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    People intrinsically feel as though they must repay those around them for helping them find their freedom and autonomy. Kant theorizes that out of good will toward others, people uphold their moral duty and do not take emotional factors such as pride and satisfaction into account. This leads into the main point of Kant’s perspective, that the action itself determines morality rather than the outcome that is achieved. By being faithful to their duty to their communities people retain their autonomy and act on their freedom, which reinforces Kant’s definition of humanity. The individual is being moral for the good of everyone involved, including themselves.…

    • 1716 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Kant’s deontology and Aristotle’s virtue ethics are similar in that they both question one’s intentions when handling issues of morality. Virtue ethics asks that one looks within, while deontology asks that one looks towards rationality and duty. Respect for humanity is essential – deontology showing this respect through requiring that one never treat another as merely a means to an end, but in respect to their means and their existence as ends as well. Virtue ethics requires such respect by way of the definition of virtue itself, meaning that a truly virtuous person would not disrespect humanity in the first place, since such an action would not seem to come from a virtuous character. Though one’s motives are questioned in both cases, the…

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays