data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/23552/23552f74826b01245fa97090bd7785fe7daada2d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/276f4/276f4ffdca460f8f7642d3cec430f9a9c290210a" alt="Sanctions: 4" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/276f4/276f4ffdca460f8f7642d3cec430f9a9c290210a" alt="Sanctions: 4" |
... four further theses: that no way of conducting rational enquiry from a standpoint independent of the particularities of any tradition has been discovered and that there is good reason to believe that there is no such way; that the problems of understanding and representing faithfully the concepts and beliefs of some tradition alien to one's own in a way that makes those concepts and beliefs intelligible within one's own tradition confront difficulties which can in certain contingent circumstances be overcome; that rival traditions have rival conceptions of rationality and of progress in understanding, but that this does not entail relativism or perspectivism; and finally that although these theses are themselves advanced from the standpoint of a particular tradition, that of a Thomist Aristotelianism, they involve a substantive and nonrelativizable conception of truth, and that in this respect as in others there is no inconsistency in making universal claims from the standpoint of a tradition.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40414/4041427a531d0b4f9a3df4b7475c11bfbc4bc274" alt="" Alasdair MacIntyre http://www.jstor.org/stable/2107828
|