麥肯泰爾論當代道德危機與德行倫理學

MacIntyre on Modern Moral Crises and Virtue Ethics

王冠生(Kuan-Sheng Wang)

《哲學論集》 42期 (2009/07) Pp. 89-112

摘要

當代德行倫理學家麥肯泰爾在《德行之後》一書中精闢地分析了當代道德失序的亂象，其指出啟蒙計畫的失敗與道德情緒主義的盛行，是造成當代道德危機最主要的原因。麥肯泰爾認為，要解決當代道德失序的亂象，必須回復亞里斯多德德行論傳統，使行為者擁有良善的動機與美好的品格。此外，麥肯泰爾也進一步從「德行與實踐」、「德行與『人生敘述整體』」、「德行與傳統」等三個面向來說明德行的意義與重要性。在本文中，筆者將探討麥肯泰爾對於當代道德危機的分析、以及對於德行倫理學的論述。文末，筆者將引用大衛•米勒與查爾斯•泰勒的理論對於麥肯泰爾的德行論提出若干檢討。米勒從德行與實踐的關係切入，質疑麥肯泰爾曲解了實踐的卓越標準。泰勒則認為除了實踐活動中的「內在善」之外，還應重視超越於實踐活動之上的「超越善」，才能找到善惡的標準。對於米勒與泰勒的批評，筆者將為麥肯泰爾辯護，不過，筆者亦非完全贊同麥肯泰爾的德行論。基本上，筆者認為，身處在二十一世紀的多元文化社會中，人們擁有不同的人生觀、宗教觀、道德觀與世界觀，很難找到彼此所共同認可的德行標準，也很難如同古希臘城邦實踐社群「共善」。此外，根據德行倫理學，也很難指引我們處理諸如墮胎、安樂死、複製人、代理孕母……等爭議性的道德問題，而在思考道德爭議與進行道德教育時，強調普遍規則的倫理學仍有其必要性。因此，筆者認為德行倫理學是對於義務論、結果論倫理學的補充，而非取代。不過，麥肯泰爾的德行論對於當代道德哲學具有相當大的貢獻與影響，其深刻地提醒我們：當思考道德哲學時，除了啟蒙運動以來所強調以規則為基礎的道德哲學之外，還有以實踐為基礎的德行倫理學，此才能完整掌握道德哲學的面貌。尤其是麥肯泰爾主張從教會、學校、鄰里、工作處所等小規模的地方性社群，透過實做活動培養德行，非常值得現代社會重視與參考。

關鍵字

麥肯泰爾 ； 德行倫理學 ； 實踐 ； 內在善 ； 卓越

並列摘要

Alasdair MacIntyre, the contemporary virtue theorist, analyzes the chaos of modern moral disorder specifically in After Virtue. He argues that the failure of the enlightenment project and the prevailing moral emotivism are the major cause of modern moral crises. Alasdair MacIntyre argues that the restoration of the tradition of Aristotelian virtue ethics is necessary for solving the chaos of the contemporary moral disorder to make people own good motivation and nice personality. Besides, Alasdair MacIntyre interprets the meaning and significance of virtue from ”virtue and practice,” ”virtue and the narrative unity of a human life” and ”virtue and tradition.” I will discuss MacIntyre's analysis of modern moral crises and discourses of virtue ethics in this article. I will quote David Miller's and Charles Taylor's theories to review MacIntyre's virtue ethics. Miller queries MacIntyre about distorting the excellence standard of practice from the relationship of virtue and practice. Taylor thinks that beside ”internal good” in the practicing activity, ”transcendent good” which transcends the practicing activity should be emphasized more to find the standard of good and evil. Against David Miller's and Charles Taylor's criticism, I will defend for MacIntyre. However, I don't totally agree with MacIntyre's virtue ethics. I argue that, basically, people possess diverse views of life, religions, morality and different worldview in the multiple society of the twentieth century. Therefore, it's hard for them to find out the standard of virtue which one identifies with another commonly and to practice common good in the community like ancient Greeks. Besides, it's also hard for us to solve controversial problems such as abortion, euthanasia, human cloning, surrogate mother……etc guided by virtue ethics. Ethics that emphasizes general rules is essential when we deal with the moral controversy and practice the moral education. Therefore, I argue that virtue ethics is a supplement to deontology and teleology rather than replacement. However, MacIntyre's virtue ethics contributes to and influences modern moral philosophy enormously. MacIntyre's virtue ethics also reminds us profoundly that we should consider both moral philosophy based on rules from the Enlightenment, and virtue ethics based on practice when thinking moral philosophy. Therefore, we can comprehend moral philosophy completely. Especially, MacIntyre argues that cultivating virtue through practicing in small local communities such as churches, schools, neighborhood, and working places. His argument is worth thinking and reference for modern societies.

並列關鍵字

Alasdair MacIntyre ； virtue ethics ； practice ； internal good ； excellence

參考文獻

Aristotle,Apostle, Hippocrates G.(trans)(1975).Nicomachean Ethics.Grinnell, Iowa:Princeton University Press.

Aristotle,Ross, David(translated introduction),Ackrill, J. L.(revised),Urmson, J. O.(revised)(1998).Nicomachean Ethics.England:Oxford University Press.

Aristotle,Lord, Carnes(trans.)(1984).Politics.Chicago:Chicago University Press.

Borradori, Giovanna(1994).The American Philosopher: conversations with Quine, Davidson, Putnam, Nozick, Danto, Rorty, Cavell, MacIntyre, and Kuhn.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Feldman, Susan(1986).Objectivity, Pluralism and Relativism: A Critique of MacIntyre' s Theory of Virtue.The Southern Journal of Philosophy.24,307-20.