"Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. and Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son." (Genesis 22: 9-10)
Student will be able to
- State why theologians give God the final word per out text.
- Explain the problem with "reliance on God" per our text.
- Define Divine Command Ethics.
- Grasp why God issues certain commandments.
- What is meant by the question, "Do the ends justify the means?"
- Define and understand the principle of double effect
- Understand Martin Buber's two stances for treating people.
- Explain criticism of Judeo-Christian Divine Command Ethics.
Highlights from text
For many people religious belief provides the final word on
any argument. If you are of a differing belief, this argumentation is not
very convincing unless supported by reason. Therefore, if your God
forbids stealing or adultery, you must come up with rational
explanations to support those prohibitions. Just because someone does
not share your religion does not mean they cannot share your ethics
Why give God the final word?
(l) He is the creator of moral and physical laws. Aquinas referred to the
system of divine moral laws as natural law. Natural law is embedded in
nature
(2) God is the best authority. God, being all-knowing, knows all facts and laws.
What is the problem with Divine Command theories of ethics?
Opponents state
- Can we really know what God wants us to do?
- Sects interpret the Bible differently.
- Laws are outdated.
Divine Command Ethics contends morals come from God, and it is within God that meaning and justification is found for moral values. All is reducible to God's commandments.
To say that an act is morally obligatory means that God commands it.
Why does God issue certain commandments?
The Judeo-Christian tradition holds that God is all good, all
knowing, all loving, and all perfect; therefore, He issues perfect
commandments for our well-being, that we may eventually be united with Him
in heaven and experience the beatific vision.
Most philosophers contend a morally perfect God would use moral reasons as a basis for issuing commandments.
|
The Judeo-Christian tradition has traditionally leaned toward the absolutist tradition in many aspects: do not steal, do not covet thy neighbor's wife, do not commit adultery, thou shalt have no other gods... It called for no exceptions. However, there are currently Christian ethicists that advocate judging each situation separately, like Fletcher who recommends the "most loving" action, regardless of whether or not it conflicts with the commandments.
Do the ends justify the means?
This questions is asking , "Does the end result justify the means
that were taken to get there?"
Relativists would say, "You have to weigh the end results (amount of good, love, happiness), versus the means (sometimes evil) used to achieve that end.
Some absolutists would say, "One can never do an evil to achieve a good, no matter how great the good." (From Romans 3:8 "Or why may we not do evil that good may come of it?...")
Within this framework, more complicated issues fall under the principle
of double effect:
Double effect refers to doing an action (which is not wrong in itself)
that directly yields a good effect, yet a bad effect also ensues, though
the bad effect is not deliberately intended and there is a weighty
reason for allowing the bad effect.
Four conditions apply to double effect:
1. The act must be morally indifferent
2. The motive of the indifferent act is desired for the good effect
3. The indifferent act must directly produce a good effect
4. The good to be attained must be at least equal to the possible evil
which may result.
- Example: hospital procedure to remove cancer (neutral act) saves mother (desired good) baby dies (unintended negative effect).
- Example: Morphine is administered (neutral act) & relieves pain (good). Morphine may depress respiration & the patient may die (unintended negative effect)
In this Judeo-Christian tradition, there are two ways of approaching human relations - to use Martin Buber's terms: (l) I/thou &(2) I/it (Kantian spin-off)
(l) I/thous are those who treat others as thous, deserving of infinite respect, reflections of and creations of God, the God waiting for us in every encounter
(2) I/its: those who treat others as objects, using others, depersonalizing others. utility based rather than love based.
Criticism/questions asked of Divine Command Ethics
- Can we really know God's will when we all interpret the Bible differently?
- Is God's will but an opiate of the believing masses?
- Does divine command undermine human autonomy? (Hinman)
- Can it be used to subjugate the masses (into castes...)
- Alfred North Whitehead, Modes of Thought, Page 15, "The simple minded use of the notions 'right or wrong' is one of the chief obstacles to the progress of understanding."
- Paul Tillich Systematic Theology Vol 1, p. 151: "The law of love is the ultimate law because it is the negation of law; it is absolute because it concerns everything concrete."
END OF LECTURE_________________________________________
See also my pages on the Golden Rule
For Discussion
Is honoring our parents honorable
because God commands it, or does God command honoring our parents
because it is honorable?
Is rape immoral because God forbids it, or does Go
forbidding rape make it immoral?
for a future lecture
 |
Virtue Ethics "Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. and Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son." (Genesis 22: 9-10)
|
| Questions for class discussion: Who is the most virtuous, he who struggles hard and does
what is right or he who does what is right without a
struggle? ======================================================================
Basic terms to know: What is a habit What is virtue What is vice What is virtue ethics? The focus is not on what action should be taken but on what one should be. It " Focuses on attitudes, dispositions, or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop our human potential." Examples are" honesty, courage, faithfulness, trustworthiness, integrity, compassion, etc. " ((Markkula http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/virtue.html ) What is its main principle?
Character: The pattern of virtues and vices revealed in the life and relationship of an individual.
What question does Ethics ask? Ethics asks, "What character traits (like honesty, compassion, fairness) are necessary to live a truly human life?" Martin in Everyday Morality defines virtues as "desirable character traits consisting of patterns of emotions, desires, attitudes, intentions, and reasoning as well as actions" (53) MacIntyre defines virtue as"An acquired human quality the possession and exercise of which tends to enable us to achieve those goods which are internal to practices and the lack of which effectively prevents us from achieving any such goods" (After Virtue 204). The Greek word for excellence, ARETE, also translates into virtue. Virtue ethicists say "the moral aim of life is to be a good person - to have virtuous character and to relate to other people in a desirable way" (Martin 43) McIntyre defines virue as "an acquired human quality the possession and exercise of which tends to enable us to chieve those goods which are internal to practices and the lack of which effectively prevents us from achieving any such goods." After Virtue What is a virtue? A desirable trait of character - a
good habit What is vice? An undesirable character trait - a bad habit
What is a trait of character? "A general feature of a person that is manifested in patterns of actions, intentions, emotions, desires, attitudes and reasoning" (Martin 43). Virtues are the traits that allow a person to live the good life and achieve the good.
Edmund Pincoffs writes that moral "virtues and vices have have the common characteristic that they are forms of regard or lack of regard for the interest of others. They are roughly of two closely related classes: those that have to do with direct concern or lack of concern for the interests of other persons, on the one hand, and those that have to do with the unfair advantage that one accords to one's own interest over the interests of others" (Quandaries and Virtues 78). These character traits run deep, revealing themselves in "essentially every dimension of human life....feelings, wants, intentions, hopes, interests, attitudes, thoughts, reasoning, relationships, speech" (Martin 43)
Virtues cannot be judge only by actions, but must take attitude into consideration. A wealthy benefactor may give our college $200,000 and a student donates $5 to the foundation drive. Who is most generous? Might the wealthy person resent the donation but feel impelled to give to get his name in the paper and create good will?
The emphasis on virtue ethics (or character ethics) is on developing as moral persons. Plato and Aristotle ask, "What is it that sets humans aside from everything else? It is our reason. Therefore, "virtues are the excellences that enable humans to exercise their powers o reasoning and live accordingly. Hence, to be virtuous is to live effectively the distinctive form of life for humans ( (Marin 44).
Aristotle says man must use reason , live a balanced life, and pursue the right good. Lublin existentialism says we make and create ourselves by our actions and that each action has an intrinsic and extrinsic effect. It affects others as well as ourselves. One of the consequences of our actions is to contribute into making us a certain kind of person. People who behave dishonestly, become dishonest People who exploit others become exploitive "users."
Pamela Moss asks in Ethics and College Student Life, "If you observe some unethical behavior and stand by mutely without trying to stop it, might this damage your character? Could ignoring evil (or merely unpleasantness) make you more evil or unpleasant yourself?" (4)
Thomas Wall writes the following:
Goal of virtue ethics: "To show us how to be happy, how to live good lives, lives of 'human flourishing.'" Contrast this to goal theories of obligation (Kant): "To teach us how to determine the difference between right and wrong. It achieves this goal by identifying rules and principles that we are obliged to follow, even if we do not want to" (Wall, Thinking Critically 46)
Strength of virtue Ethics: 1/ There is more to ethics than using rules and principles to assess right and wrong behavior. In addition to doing right, our moral lives also involve becoming morally good persons (Wall 45-46) Morally good persons are those who have acquired the habit of doing good, not just the knowledge. 2. Virtue Ethics encourages us to go beyond the call of duty & become the best person we can be. It presents us with a moral ideal. the moral ideal provides us with a conception of the good life, a life that is the most likely to give us "flourishing" (Wall 49) Weakness: The central objection to virtue ethics it that it "provides us with no way to tell the difference between right and wrong. It gives us no theory of obligation" (Wall 49).
Examples of weakness: Virtues can be used for evil = giving generously to the evil, being loyal and brave to a wicked cause
Contemporary virtue ethicists claim the lifeblood and heart of ethics is virtue and not over-emphasis of dry moral rules and principles. The Markkula Center of Applied Ethics states, "The fundamental question of ethics is not "What should I do", but "What kind of person should I be?" Virtue ethicists contend we should strive to develop virtues, our personal excellences, so that me may truly be what we were destined to be. What are these virtues? Positive traits which enable us to be fully human: prudence, fairness,, courage,, temperance, self-control, honesty, compassion.... "Virtues" are attitudes, dispositions, or character traits that enable us to be and to act in ways that develop this potential. They enable us to pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtues are acquired through repeated action, so they are positive habits which characterize us. The ethical person is the virtuous person. As Aristotle said, "Excellence is a habit." In closing, to quote Markkula Center of Applied Ethics, "The moral life, then, is not simply a matter of following moral rules and of learning to apply them to specific situations. The moral life is also a matter of trying to determine the kind of people we should be and of attending to the development of character within our communities and ourselves."
A lovely quote: Aristotle and Plato, however, knew something contemporary moral philosophers have forgotten or renounced: The reason for studying ethics is to become a better person. To do that, we need self-scrutiny and transformation by attachment to a good beyond the self. Analytical skills alone will not get us out of the cave and into the light. William C. Spohn, Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good at Santa Clara University.
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) contends community, relationships and character growth are inextricably linked. Humans live best in well-ordered communities that sustain virtues.
Selected links on virtue ethics
Comment on Abraham & Isaac The
sacrifice of Abraham was a test of Abraham's obedience and it was a
prefigurement of the crucifixion. God can dispense from the natural
law and in this case he directly inspired Abraham to do this. He
cannot dispense from the natural law when it comes to himself because this
would involve him in self-contradiction. But since He created the
world, He can dispense with it when it comes to his creation which he did
in the sacrifice of Isaac. The angel stopped it, though, to that God
does not approve of infant sacrifice, something characteristic of
Canaanite religion at the time and also because Abraham showed he was
willing to give up his most loved object from love of God. No one
else can dispense from the natural law, except God. It is a mystery
of faith. Is what is holy - holy because the gods approve it, or do they approve it
because it is holy?
|
*********************************************************************
For an action to be perfectly right, (according to the higher standard, ) Act, Circumstance and Intention must all be good:
Example:
Act: Talking about Jane's finances, getting angry at a friend,
keeping
money that was in the glove compartment of a car that was sold to you by a
friend.
Circumstance:
Who did this?
Didn't they know better?
Was force involved?
How much money was taken and from whom?
How much harm?
Where was it done?
Intention: intention is really a circumstance, but it is so important because it is the reason a person acts.
I limit my eating to be healthy, to live a long life and to be sociable - or do I limit my eating to be anorexic or to take revenge on someone or to become sick and get attention .
I tell the truth to an individual - that the wedding dress is the ugliest thing I've ever seen because I want to get back at the individual for mean things she had done to me
I respond with frank accuracy when and say that person X is a busy-body, selfish, ungrateful, money-hungry social climber because that person gets on my nerves.
I refrain from spending my hard-earned money on a prostitute even though I really want to purchase the services - and i refrain because I am either cheap or planning on gambling.
So the intention can change a good object into one that is questionable or wrong.)
- No intention or circumstance can ever make a bad act good.
- We can never do evil to create good.
- The means never justify the ends.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comment on Abraham & Isaac
The
sacrifice of Abraham was a test of Abraham's obedience and it was a
prefigurement of the crucifixion. God can dispense from the natural
law and in this case he directly inspired Abraham to do this. He
cannot dispense from the natural law when it comes to himself because this
would involve him in self-contradiction. But since He created the
world, He can dispense with it when it comes to his creation which he did
in the sacrifice of Isaac. The angel stopped it, though, to that God
does not approve of infant sacrifice, something characteristic of
Canaanite religion at the time and also because Abraham showed he was
willing to give up his most loved object from love of God. No one
else can dispense from the natural law, except God. It is a mystery
of faith.
Is what is holy - holy because the gods approve it, or do they approve it
because it is holy?
Plato( 428---348 B.C.) records that Socrates (470-399B.C.
Euthyphro)
asks the above question.