Ed Feser has a book on Aristotle, Aristotle's Revenge.
This is apparently along the lines of the Rambam who held Aristotle was the best.
But from what I can tell Feser deals with how Aristotle would answer modern problems. [But also I should add he is building a system based on Aristotle and with insights from analytic philosophy. I do not think he is claiming to be simply explaining Aristotle.]
But there is a whole other train of thought by Kelley Ross going with Plato as he would modify Plato in the light of Kant and Leonard Nelson.
Then there is Michael Huemer who holds from idea that reason recognizes universals. He builds on Prichard. [This is really not all that different from Hegel]
These three strands in philosophy today seem to me to be much more in common than they differ in details.
All hold the same basic thesis that was stated simply by Dr Huemer: Reason recognizes universals (which includes moral principles) and that morality is objective
This is apparently along the lines of the Rambam who held Aristotle was the best.
But from what I can tell Feser deals with how Aristotle would answer modern problems. [But also I should add he is building a system based on Aristotle and with insights from analytic philosophy. I do not think he is claiming to be simply explaining Aristotle.]
But there is a whole other train of thought by Kelley Ross going with Plato as he would modify Plato in the light of Kant and Leonard Nelson.
Then there is Michael Huemer who holds from idea that reason recognizes universals. He builds on Prichard. [This is really not all that different from Hegel]
These three strands in philosophy today seem to me to be much more in common than they differ in details.
All hold the same basic thesis that was stated simply by Dr Huemer: Reason recognizes universals (which includes moral principles) and that morality is objective
