{"id":{"repo_id":"sbts","oai_identifier":"oai:repository.sbts.edu:10392/5065"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/sbts/oai:repository.sbts.edu:10392/5065","repository":{"repo_id":"sbts","name":"Southern Baptist Theological Seminary","base_url":"https://repository.sbts.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"A Comparative Critique of the Moral Philosophies of Alasdair MacIntyre and John Hare","abstract":"This dissertation argues that the Aristotelianism of Alasdair MacIntyre is more cogent than the prescriptive realism of John Hare. Chapter 1 introduces the relationship between moral philosophy and apologetics and presents the thesis of the dissertation. Chapter 2 surveys the Aristotelian elements of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy and provides an argument that these aspects of MacIntyre’s philosophy provide his Aristotelianism with significant explanatory scope. Chapter 3 continues an analysis of MacIntyre’s philosophy. The argument of this chapter is that the Thomist elements of MacIntyre’s philosophy further the explanatory scope of his Aristotelianism. The chapter concludes with a response to two major objections. Chapter 4 presents the moral philosophy of John Hare and argues that three areas that appear to provide explanatory scope do not. Chapter 5 summarizes the Kantian elements of John Hare’s moral philosophy. The argument of chapter 6 is that the primary argument of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy is sounder than the primary argument of John Hare’s moral philosophy. Chapter 7 provides the conclusion of the dissertation and explores the implications of MacIntyre’s Aristotelianism for Christian apologetics.","abstract_html":"This dissertation argues that the Aristotelianism of Alasdair MacIntyre is more cogent than the prescriptive realism of John Hare. Chapter 1 introduces the relationship between moral philosophy and apologetics and presents the thesis of the dissertation. Chapter 2 surveys the Aristotelian elements of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy and provides an argument that these aspects of MacIntyre’s philosophy provide his Aristotelianism with significant explanatory scope. Chapter 3 continues an analysis of MacIntyre’s philosophy. The argument of this chapter is that the Thomist elements of MacIntyre’s philosophy further the explanatory scope of his Aristotelianism. The chapter concludes with a response to two major objections. Chapter 4 presents the moral philosophy of John Hare and argues that three areas that appear to provide explanatory scope do not. Chapter 5 summarizes the Kantian elements of John Hare’s moral philosophy. The argument of chapter 6 is that the primary argument of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy is sounder than the primary argument of John Hare’s moral philosophy. Chapter 7 provides the conclusion of the dissertation and explores the implications of MacIntyre’s Aristotelianism for Christian apologetics.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Freeman, Russell H."],"institution":"Southern Baptist Theological Seminary","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Cabal, Theodore J."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2016,"date_issued":"2016-01-12","date_published":"2016-01-12","updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:04:39Z","subjects":[],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10392/5065","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Cabal, Theodore J."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Freeman, Russell H."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2016-01-12T18:11:50Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2016-01-12T18:11:50Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2016-01-12"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["Southern Baptist Theological Seminary"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Electronic dissertation","Text"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10392/5065"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This dissertation argues that the Aristotelianism of Alasdair MacIntyre is more cogent than the prescriptive realism of John Hare. Chapter 1 introduces the relationship between moral philosophy and apologetics and presents the thesis of the dissertation. Chapter 2 surveys the Aristotelian elements of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy and provides an argument that these aspects of MacIntyre’s philosophy provide his Aristotelianism with significant explanatory scope. Chapter 3 continues an analysis of MacIntyre’s philosophy. The argument of this chapter is that the Thomist elements of MacIntyre’s philosophy further the explanatory scope of his Aristotelianism. The chapter concludes with a response to two major objections. Chapter 4 presents the moral philosophy of John Hare and argues that three areas that appear to provide explanatory scope do not. Chapter 5 summarizes the Kantian elements of John Hare’s moral philosophy. The argument of chapter 6 is that the primary argument of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy is sounder than the primary argument of John Hare’s moral philosophy. Chapter 7 provides the conclusion of the dissertation and explores the implications of MacIntyre’s Aristotelianism for Christian apologetics."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A Comparative Critique of the Moral Philosophies of Alasdair MacIntyre and John Hare"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Cabal, Theodore J."],"dc:creator":["Freeman, Russell H."],"dc:date.accessioned":["2016-01-12T18:11:50Z"],"dc:date.available":["2016-01-12T18:11:50Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2016-01-12"],"dc:description.abstract":["This dissertation argues that the Aristotelianism of Alasdair MacIntyre is more cogent than the prescriptive realism of John Hare. Chapter 1 introduces the relationship between moral philosophy and apologetics and presents the thesis of the dissertation. Chapter 2 surveys the Aristotelian elements of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy and provides an argument that these aspects of MacIntyre’s philosophy provide his Aristotelianism with significant explanatory scope. Chapter 3 continues an analysis of MacIntyre’s philosophy. The argument of this chapter is that the Thomist elements of MacIntyre’s philosophy further the explanatory scope of his Aristotelianism. The chapter concludes with a response to two major objections. Chapter 4 presents the moral philosophy of John Hare and argues that three areas that appear to provide explanatory scope do not. Chapter 5 summarizes the Kantian elements of John Hare’s moral philosophy. The argument of chapter 6 is that the primary argument of MacIntyre’s moral philosophy is sounder than the primary argument of John Hare’s moral philosophy. Chapter 7 provides the conclusion of the dissertation and explores the implications of MacIntyre’s Aristotelianism for Christian apologetics."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10392/5065"],"dc:publisher.institution":["Southern Baptist Theological Seminary"],"dc:title":["A Comparative Critique of the Moral Philosophies of Alasdair MacIntyre and John Hare"],"dc:type":["Electronic dissertation","Text"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:04:39Z"}