{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02183803457688808, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.358381502890174, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Alasdair MacIntyre and Radically Dialogical Politics

In this paper, I show that in the field of political theology, Alasdair MacIntyre is best seen not as the harbinger of an isolated, nostalgic, and conservative politics, but as an advocate of a kind of pluralistic dialog similar to that advocated by adherents of radical democracy. After an overview of MacIntyre's contemporary appropriation of Aristotle, I argue that reading MacIntyre in the light of his rejection of the fact-value distinction helps show the radical (rather than balkanizing) theo-political implications of his work, and dissolves many of the obstacles that might cause one to suspect that MacIntyre's project necessarily leads to withdrawal from pluralistic society. In conclusion, I sketch the contours of a MacIntyrean politics by way of his anthropological insights in Dependent Rational Animals. From this angle, one can see MacIntyre advocating a “local politics of dependence” that does not eschew inter-traditioned dialog, but seeks to enable its occurrence despite the resistance provided by the modern nation-state.