Chapter 2: Ethical Traditions |
Section 13: Post Modernism-Relativism |
(NOTE: You must read
only those linked materials that are preceded by the capitalized word READ.) |
During the Twentieth Century the advanced technological societies
of the West and some in the East experienced a decline in the number of
people who practiced their religion regularly and accepted a morality
based upon Natural Law Theory. There
was a decline in the belief that: 1.
there is a single reality and that humans can have knowledge of it. 2.
there is objective truth 3.
there are absolutes This decline can be attributed to a number of factors: 1.
the increase in information about other cultures and their various
practices, beliefs and values, 2.
advances in what science and technology could provide for humans in
improvements in their basic living along with an appreciation for material
goods, 3.
the spreading influence of ideas from the existentialist and
pragmatist movements 4.
the spread of democratic ideals In the Post Modern view there are no absolutes of any kind and
there are no universal truths nor universal criteria for beauty and nor
are there universal principles of the GOOD.
Thus, there is a return of relativism in the sphere of morality.
With that return there is also the threat of chaos which relativism
spawns. As reaction to this
trend there is an increase in the numbers of people returning to religion
and religious principles as the foundation for their moral lives.
The fastest growing religion in the world is Islam.
Islam is increasing in its population through a birth rate higher
than average and through conversions.
Islam fundamentalism is growing in the number of adherents.
Fundamentalists of Islam and of Christianity and Judaism are all
declaring their condemnation of the current state of moral decline and the
rise of relativism and materialism. In moral theory there has developed a number of
traditions that extol alternatives to the teleological and deontological
approaches based upon reason and the belief that universal principles can
be reached through the exercise of reason. The Existentialists called for an acceptance of the inescapable role of human emotions. The Pragmatists focused on the impossibility of reason reaching
beyond the frailties of limitations of human reason. Feminist theoreticians have devised a number of
approaches to ethics that have at least this much in common: the denial of
previous theories as being biased and deluded.
Existentialism
Nietzsche on Master and Slave Morality
====================================== Omonia Vinieris (QCC, 2002) Nietzsche’s Will to Power Nietzsche’s ethical principle of the will to power makes a claim to the egoistic nature of humanity. The doctrine asserts that all humans strive to forcibly impose their will upon others as a primal drive in their nature compels them to do so. Man will relentlessly exercise his will over others as an example of his determination, spirit, and strength of character. To demonstrate and acquire his power and influence is his inherent motivation to act, even if his actions essentially seem unselfishly provoked. Nietzsche alleges that no true altruistic deeds exist because humans are wholly egocentric and self-seeking by nature. We may give the impression that we are considerate, caring, and selfless as we may perform kind deeds for others that regard us as humane, but our innate intensions are truly self-absorbed and do not entail goodness or benevolence. By this, Nietzsche does not suggest by any means that mankind is innately malicious out of its deceptive intentions, but rather that it is more rapt in its own aspirations or purposes of life. These aspirations are to be esteemed as an example of human prominence and not mistaken for the malice and deterioration of mankind. Conversely, sympathy, generosity, and equality are all qualities that one associates with good moral character, not with contemptibility as Nietzsche does. The noble spirit that Nietzsche speaks of would not embrace these traditional ethical traits. To manipulate characters of fragility and frailty, to indulge in one’s supremacy, and to pamper one’s self with praise, are preferably what Nietzsche considers to be the intrinsic and admirable traits of the good. Traditional ethicists revile these characteristics and see them as they may prompt the decaying of civilization. Nevertheless, Nietzsche merely suggests that it is instinctive of humans to inflict their will to power. Analogously, the Darwinist theory of evolution verifies such a claim as it is the survival of the fittest that determines what species endures and what species ceases to exist. The fittest in accordance to Nietzsche’s ethical principles are the good and those who strive to dominate over inferior beings. Perhaps this is precisely why many conventional ethicists would refute Nietzsche’s will to power. It is evident that the fundamental institution of morals into society is to impede many of our natural propensities in order to avert the chaotic unruliness that may arise from them. Nietzsche distinguishes between noble (masters) and base (slaves) souls. The concept of a noble soul originates from Nietzsche’s admiration of ancient Greek culture. The ancient Greeks were an animated people who paradoxically welcomed the inevitability of death, facing the ordeals and hardships of life, whilst celebrating its magnificence. The noble soul or master, according to Nietzsche, is a replica of the ancient Greek. He grows comfortably amidst the suffering and toils of human pain as he confronts life. This confrontation is natural and only drives him to grow and acquire more. He may have to exploit the base soul for his own good, but this maltreatment of another being only supplements his pride and his will to power. In this sense, affliction provides the master with the prospect of extensive growth, and does not hinder his path to power. On the contrary, the base spirit or slave trembles in the face of affliction. He does not challenge the hardships of life, but rather seeks to assuage the pain which he finds intolerable. Such a being seeks out consolation from others out of his apprehension and despicability. He considers sympathy, benevolence, and equality to be the essential attributes of goodness because they falsely detract from the injustice and agony of life. The slaves are inferior to the master in that they do not anticipate growing in a torturous, pain-inflicted world. Nietzsche considers this base soul to represent the greater part of humanity today. Thus, his ethical principle of the noble’s will to power over the base epitomizes a complete avant-garde reversal of the nature of bad and good in traditional ethical thought. =========================================== Nietzsche’s anti Ethics
Nietzsche submits this idea of morality to radical critique.
He believes both that the idea is philosophically insupportable and
that when we understand its genealogy, we will see that what actually
explains our having it are profoundly negative aspects of human life.
Morality is an ideology. We
can believe it only if we ignore why we do.
Central to Nietzsche’s thought is a fundamental distinction
between the ideas of good and bad, on the one hand, and those of (moral)
good and evil, on the other. The natural form ethical evaluation first takes, he
believes, is that of excellence or merit.
People who excel, who have merits we admire and esteem, thereby
have a kind of natural nobility.
A. These are
“rank-ordering, rank-defining value judgments.”
We naturally look up to, we respect and esteem, those with
merit. He calls them
“knightly aristocratic values”
B. The “primary” half of the pair is good.
Bad is what is not-good. What
is not worthy of esteem and respect.
C. The “good” features are naturally “positive”:
they affirm and sustain life, vigor, strength, etc., e.g. openness,
cheerfulness, creativity, physical strength, agility, grace, beauty,
vigor, health, wit, intelligence, charm, and friendliness.
On the other hand, the “primary” half of the good/evil
pair is evil. The idea of evil is reactive. It
comes from the negation of good. Indeed,
Nietzsche believes that it derives from negating good (natural merit).
And the idea of moral
good is simply the negation of that negation.
It is what is not evil.
The original negation is due to resentment—a psychological
process through which the
naturally weak suppress their anger at being slighted by
the strong who consider them of little merit.
Unable to express their anger honestly, they suppress it to an unconscious level, in the
“dark workshop” of the human psyche.
It then comes to be expressed not as personal anger, but in an
alienated, impersonal form, namely, as moral indignation and resentment.
The strong who disrespect the weak are seen, by virtue of their
disrespect, as deserving moral disapproval—as being evil.
We can see how this process is supposed to work in
Nietzsche’s parable of the
lambs and the birds of prey . The
birds see the lambs as their natural
inferiors, as meat. The lambs
are angered by this, but can’t do anything
about it directly by expressing personal anger.
So they express their anger in an impersonal way.
They reproach the birds; they hold them morally responsible for
what they lambs see as their evil conduct.
They project the ideology of morality, which is just the impersonal
expression of their personal anger and hatred.
Nietzsche is saying that morality is born in denial.
The problem
from Nietzsche’s perspective is that, unlike the birds of prey, the
naturally strong have been taken in by this ideology. Through Judaeo-Christian religion, a “priestly caste” has taken
over culture to such a degree that the ideology of morality is now the
dominant view. But in
addition to being born in hatred and denial, Nietzsche believes both that
the idea of morality is philosophically insupportable (for example, in its
assumption of free will) as well as one that has terrible consequences for
human culture—it is an ethic of weakness and illness that chokes off
genuine human achievement.
READ: The Ethics of an Immoralist PROBLEMS: a. Some people feel that the will to power advocated by Nietzsche encourages people to be callous and cruel, ignoring humanity for the sake of gaining power.
c. Theists can also argue that the will to power can be seen as merely a response to helplessness, as Nietzsche's method for wishing to attain control of a life that is really left up to God. Sartre - Existentialist Ethics Professor Zaldiva ========================================================================
Pragmatism
READ:
Pragmatic Ethics by Hugh LaFollette
For pragmatists the matter of ethics is approached practically.
Our practices are our habits. In pragmatic ethics there is the
Primacy of Habits, which empower and restrict.
They explore the Social nature of habits and the relation of habit
to will. For them Morality Is a Habit and being fallibilists,
pragmatists know that no habits are flawless.
They also hold that Morality is social and that Changing habits for
moral reasons is necessary. Features of pragmatic ethics Employs criteria, but is not criterial Gleaning insights from other ethical theories Relative without being relativistic Tolerant without being irresolute Theory and Practice “Embracing a Pragmatist Ethic A pragmatic ethic is not based on principles, but it is not
unprincipled. Deliberation plays a significant role, albeit a different
role than that given it on most accounts. Morality does not seek final
absolute answers, yet it is not perniciously relativistic. It does
recognize that circumstances can be different, and that in different
circumstances, different actions may be appropriate. So it does not demand
moral uniformity between people and across cultures. Moreover, it
understands moral advance as emerging from the crucible of experience, not
through the proclamations of something or someone outside us. Just as
ideas only prove their superiority in dialogue and in conflict with other
ideas, moral insight can likewise prove its superiority in dialogue and
conflict with other ideas and experiences. Hence, some range of moral
disagreement and some amount of different action will be not be, for the
pragmatist, something to bemoan. It will be integral to moral advancement,
and thus should be permitted and even praised, not lamented. Only someone
who thought theory could provide final answers, and answers without the
messy task of doing battle on the marketplace of ideas and of life, would
find this regrettable” VIRTUE ETHICS There are three basic approaches to Normative Ethics 1.DEONTOLOGY Rule based- what ought I to do Right and wrong actions 2. CONSEQUENTIALISM Outcomes- what result will follow for myself or all others Good or bad consequences 3. VIRTUE ETHICS or VIRTUE THEORY ---concern with virtues and moral character e.g. Ethics of Care and Agent based theories What makes a good person? The Focus is on virtue and not actions There are No rules and No guides. Can’t ask “What should I do? Instead ask “What kind of life should I live?” “How can I be consistent in my moral actions?” VIRTUES are stated as givens within a culture. Goal is to pursue a virtuous life and for that practice the GOLDEN MEAN between two extremes (vices) There is a Mean between two extremes—mid point Being virtuous means (1)acting in accord with a virtue and (2) being in proper mental state-i.e., wanting to be virtuous One becomes virtuous by repeated act What we do determines who we become To be an excellent person: “Fake it until you make it” Repeat the virtuous acts bring you to best version of yourself Go beyond mere habits to understanding what a virtuous life is Virtue theory, also known as virtue ethics, is a branch of normative ethics that focuses on the development and cultivation of virtuous character traits as the foundation for ethical decision-making and living a good life. Unlike other ethical theories that emphasize rules, consequences, or duties, virtue theory centers on the idea that being a good person involves cultivating specific virtues and traits of character. Key elements of virtue theory include: 1. Virtues: Virtues are positive character traits that contribute to human flourishing and well-being. Examples of virtues include courage, honesty, compassion, generosity, humility, patience, and integrity. These virtues are seen as guiding principles for how individuals should live and interact with others. 2. Eudaimonia: Eudaimonia is often translated as "happiness," "flourishing," or "well-being." In virtue theory, the ultimate goal of human life is to achieve eudaimonia by cultivating virtues and living in accordance with them. Eudaimonia is not merely a fleeting feeling of pleasure but a deeper sense of fulfillment and purpose. 3. Moral Exemplars: Virtue theory often looks to moral exemplars, individuals who embody and exemplify virtuous character traits, as role models for ethical behavior. These individuals serve as inspirations for others to develop similar virtues. 4. Moral Education: Virtue ethics emphasizes the importance of moral education and character development. It suggests that individuals can cultivate virtues through practice, reflection, and habituation. Virtuous actions become second nature through repeated choices and efforts. 5. Agent-Centered Approach: Unlike some other ethical theories that focus on actions, consequences, or rules, virtue theory places a primary emphasis on the character and intentions of the moral agent. It is concerned with the question of what kind of person one should be rather than simply what one should do. Historical figures associated with virtue ethics include Aristotle and Confucius. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, for example, is a foundational text in virtue theory, where he outlines his understanding of virtues, eudaimonia, and the importance of cultivating virtuous character. Critics of virtue theory sometimes raise concerns about its potential subjectivity and lack of clear guidelines for action in morally complex situations. However, proponents argue that virtue ethics provides a robust framework for addressing ethical dilemmas by focusing on the development of a virtuous character that can navigate complex situations in a morally praiseworthy manner. VIEW: (1)Virtue Ethics | Ethics Defined (2) Virtue Ethics
Feminist Ethics This theory or approach to ethics is based on the assumptions that the world is male oriented, devised by men and dominated on a male emphasis on systems of inflexible rules. The goal of feminist ethics is to create a plan that will hopefully end the social and political oppression of women. It is believed that the female perspective of the world can be shaped into a value theory.
Read this material:
FEMINISM AND POST MODERNISM http://www.cddc.vt.edu/feminism/pom.html Post Modernism and its Critics http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/Faculty/murphy/436/pomo.htm These are three of many popular theories
concerning the GOOD which hold for no single universal principle of the
GOOD. Instead they relate the
determination of such a principle to be an exercise in POWER or self
service which is put under a disguise of being a rational exercise of an
unbiased mind. What they have
in common is a relativism. The
need for societies to have a moral foundation are not being served well by
what are at their base appeals to power as the only basis for the
resolution of conflict. For
these theories, morality collapses into self serving exercises. What are we left with then? |
Proceed to the next section by clicking here> next section Copyright Philip A. Pecorino 2002. All Rights reserved. Web Surfer's Caveat: These are class notes, intended to comment on readings and amplify class discussion. They should be read as such. They are not intended for publication or general distribution |
Return to: Table of Contents for the Online Textbook |