Modern French Philosophy: a Study of the Development Since ComteGunn, John Alexander
Philosophy
Modern French Philosophy: a Study of the Development Since Comte
Gunn, John Alexander
Philosophy, French; Philosophy, Modern
The fact of living in a society, highly organised although it be, does
not diminish at all the moral significance of personality. Rights and
duties belong essentially to persons and to them only. We must beware
of the political philosophy which regards the citizens as existing only
for the state. Rather the state exists, or should exist, for the
welfare of the citizens. In the past this was a grave defect of
military despotisms, and was well illustrated by the view of the state
taken, or rather inculcated, by German political philosophy. In the
future the danger of the violation of personality may lie, Renouvier
thinks, in another direction—namely, in the establishment of
Communistic states. The basic principle of his ethic is the person as
an end in himself, and the treatment of persons as ends. If this be so,
a Communistic Republic which has as its motto “Each for all,” without
also “All for each,” may gravely violate personality and the moral law
if, by constraint, it treats all its citizens and their efforts not as
ends in themselves, but merely means to the collective ends of all.
The moral ideal demands that personality must not be obliterated.
Personality bound up with “autonomy of reason” is the fundamental
ethical fact.[25] In the last resort, responsibility rests upon the
individuals of the society for the evils of the system of social
organisation under which they live. The state itself cannot be regarded
as a moral person. Renouvier opposes strongly any doctrine which tends
to the personalisation or the deification of the state.
[25] Note that Renouvier prefers this term to Kant’s “autonomy of
will,” which he thinks confuses moral obligation and free-will.
He combats also the modern doctrines of “nationality,” and claims that
even the idea of the state is a higher one, for it at any rate involves
co-operating personalities, while a nation is a fiction, of which no
satisfactory definition can be given. He laughs at the “unity of
language, race, culture and religion,” and asks where we can find a
nation?[26] War and death have long since destroyed such united and
harmonious groups as were found in ancient times.
[27] _Science de la Morale_, vol. 2, chap. xcvi, “_Idées de la
Nationalité et d’Etat_,” pp. 416-427.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account