The ethics of Hercules : $b A study of man's body as the sole determinant of ethical valuesGivler, Robert Chenault
Philosophy
The ethics of Hercules : $b A study of man's body as the sole determinant of ethical values
Givler, Robert Chenault
Ethics; Psychophysiology
We can now better understand the statement previously made that the
personification of conscience was the peculiar artifice, the “useful
dodge,” of a certain school of ethical thinkers in the XVIII century.
Consequently it is erroneous to suppose that the commonplace view
of this phenomenon has always held undisputed sway over theoretical
ethics. It had no place whatever in the minds of Greek ethical
writers. Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and their contemporaries
founded the science of ethics without even dreaming that there was
a conscience. Epictetus, Epicurus, and Marcus Aurelius showed no
poverty of constructive thought for the lack of it. Even Helvetius,
a contemporary of the intuitionists, rejected it as spurious when he
wrote: “He who will warrant his virtue in every situation is either
an impostor or a fool; characters equally to be mistrusted.”
Most people who have heard the name of John Locke will recall his
arguments against the assumptions of the moral intuitionists in
those passages where he combats the theory of innate moral ideas.
According to Locke, all such ideas would have to be (1) independent
of geographical location and climate, (2) independent of the age of
the person and of his training, and (3) recognized by all persons as
fundamental. But none of these conditions are found to be satisfied
by anyone who makes the shortest pilgrimage through the world in the
search for these statistics. And consequently the intellectually
honest Locke rejects the philosophical theory of conscience,
independently of his recognition of the facts of self-approval and
self-disapproval.
It remained, however, for John Stuart Mill to foreshadow the
beginning of the end of this fantastic theory of the moral faculty in
Chapter III of his “Utilitarianism.” He writes:—
“The internal sanction of duty, whatever our standard of duty
may be, is one and the same—a feeling in our own mind; a pain,
more or less intense, attendant on violation of duty, which in
properly cultivated moral natures rises, in more serious cases,
into shrinking from it as an impossibility. This feeling ... is
the essence of Conscience; though in that complex phenomenon as it
actually exists, the simple fact is in general all encrusted over
with collateral associations, derived from sympathy, from love,
and still more from fear; from all the forms of religious feeling;
from the recollections of childhood and of all our past life; from
self-esteem, desire of the esteem of others, and occasionally even
self-abasement.”
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