From Grammar to Metaphysics, From Adjectives to Evils

Prof. Alasdair MacIntyre

1. Some of the uses of words like good and bad in everyday language presuppose what it is for human
beings to flourish.

2. Such a conception finds expression in those uses of “good” in which we make our actions intelligible
to others and to ourselves by identifying various goods as providing us with reasons for acting as we do.

What qualities do we need if we are to act as good human beings do

3. This enables to formulate : If to act intelligibly is to act for the sake of achieving what has taken to be
good, how is it that we act so badly in so many ways?

4. Why, and under what circumstances we might be justified in speaking not of good and bad but of
good and evil?

Non-dependent adjectives (good and bad, unlike red or rectangular) – the criteria for their correct
application as adjectives with the nouns to which they are attached

The standards for which we judge “jam” as a good jam are different from the standards for which we
judge “president” as a good president. Other examples – “good chess player”

We normally and intuitively prioritize in our conceptualization how one can be good at something
before we can say one is bad at it. Good seems to be ontologically prior to bad.

Differential uses of what is good or bad.