Ask, and ye shall recieve
Or more appropriately, complain on your blog and you shall recieve. I'm sitting here at 11:30, practically the beginning of my evening, and I have nothing that I need to do... at least nothing I need to do that I can do until morning. I've been sitting here listening to classical music, reading a book, and I thought that you guys deserved an update since you were willing to listen to me whine. Anyway, I've been thinking.Our philosophy course this semester is Ethics, and I am enjoying it; it's one of the first times we've been able to actually "practice" philosophy, use reasonable methods to try to consider the way things are. I've thought about these things on my own before, and I have to admit that I've not come to any real conclusions yet. But it's always good to put your thoughts on... well, not exactly paper, but something more permanent than memory. If I start making no sense, feel free to either ignore me or slap me around in the comments.
First. I make a distinction between ethics and morality, one that is different from most people's distinction. I consider people in two ways: as individuals and as part of the herd. Individuals, I believe, make their moral decisions because of their conscience, whatever that may mean. It is internal, though, not forced upon them. People as part of the whole, however, follow laws. These are ethical rules that relate to the working of the whole rather than the individual. So: morality, individual conscience; ethics, rules of the whole.
This solves a number of problems. Most people who think about these things (poor sods) divide into two camps: consequentialists, who think that the outcome is the most important part, and... er, well, nonconsequentialists, who for the most part think that doing the right thing has intrinsic value. Both sides often go head to head because, while no one wants to admit that they're wrong, everyone seems to think that both sides are kind of important, and it's really hard to reconcile them. But me, if people can be seen as part of the whole (and that's a whole 'nother shebang, but take my word for it) then it's the consequences that matter. As far as it concerns the individual, it is the act of doing the right action that matters.
I know, the wording of the last sentence is awkward, but it's on purpose. I don't believe anymore that someone's intent matters. I used to, but now I don't. Well, I do, but in a different way. I've picked up an idea from some people who disagreed with me. They said that if someone claims to be doing something for a good reason, then they are not doing something to be good, but only for the credit. I don't think about it in those kind of cynical terms, but I have noticed that anytime you consider why you do something, you run into trouble; that is, you are simply doing things for your own good, and that's no good at all. Pretty much any justification other than "it's the right thing to do" leads me into trouble.
So, I shouldn't do things because it's the law, or because the person I am helping will help me later. What, then, is my motivation? It'll sound corny, but it's not. Love. If you are doing something out of love, then you aren't thinking about why you're doing it. It's just the right thing to do. This is unconditional, Godly love I'm talking about; the Big Love as a churchmate used to put it. This is also why humans fail at being moral a lot of the time; they're not capable of that kind of love.
Ethics is different, but that's really another post.
Anyway, tell me what you think.
posted by Emmett @ 23:25
3 Comments:
I hate the claim that there's no such thing as a selfless action because there's invariably some sort of reward. This claim relies on sophistry and confusion of the difference between the word "motivation" and the word "consequence."
Interesting. I was aware of a divide between individual and group behavior, but I've not thought about it in that light. I'd like to hear your ethics spiel when you have time to write it.
As for morality, I tend to think of motivation as falling into one of the following (in order of increasing... um... goodness... or something): Fear of punishment, thought of reward, Duty, and Love.
I include in thought of reward things like self-justification and and the pleasure of being right when all those slobs are messing up. In other words, Pride.
Duty takes a bit of explanation. When I say Duty, I very much mean a "because it's right" sort of justification, but if the person were to dig around their mind a bit, they'd find ideals as motivation. A love of or conviction in a system of thought and behavior in and of itself, perhaps, separate from punishment or reward implied by that system. I believe it's good to be enthusiastic about this sort of thing, and devotion to a set of ideals can get you farther than the first two items... but it will only get you so far.
And that's where Love moves in and takes over. It's interesting that the first three items--Punishment, Reward, and Duty--all focus on a system. Punishment implies there is a set of rules and consequences, and your concern is avoiding painful consequences. Reward implies a set of rules and consequences, with a focus on garnering pleasant consequences promised. Duty requires a set of rules and a code...possibly with consequences, but those aren't important to someone going on Duty alone. Love, though, just needs another person to love. Sometimes not even that. It will often work within a specific system of behavior to define what the best thing you can do for this person is, but its motivation is totally outside the system.
Doncha just love how many capital letters Christians use? ;)
I disagree that intent has no bearing on morality. Ethics and morality are games of probability. In the process of doing good, say protecting someone from being beaten on the street, they may do wrong, if the victim had done something of terrible evil earlier. One may also believe that they're acting only in self-interest but end up aiding many other people besides. To go the purely consequentalist route is to ultimately leave all of your actions up to chance. Not that intent is all that matters. One must be responsible for their actions and their consequences as well.
*poke*
Hi? Anyone here?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home