I didn't really feel inclined to discuss this from an Aristotelian viewpoint, partially because it's been a LONG time since I have read the Ethics, but C.S. Lewis does comment on this a little bit in Mere Christianity, saying that there must be some ethical principles found in nature, because while every culture may have a different moral code, there are still foundations to those moral codes that are similar. One example he used was that complete selfishness is not honored in any society- some societies may say that you ought to only be unselfish to your family while others may say you should be unselfish towards everyone, but no culture admires a person solely looking out for himself at the expense of everyone else.
I was also thinking about the question of "ought" versus "is" argument- that ethical behavior cannot be a natural law, because the laws of nature describe what actually occurs, whereas ethical law describes what ought to occur. I wondered, if ethics really are natural laws, then whether ethical behavior really is an "is" for humans- humans by nature do behave a certain way, but that the unnatural event of the fall and the fact that we are made with the ability to choose, as opposed to a stone that follows the law of gravity no matter what, allows us to be frequently acting against nature and against the laws of humanity that should be just as binding on us as other laws of nature are on other objects.
Posts
2 comments:
I didn't really feel inclined to discuss this from an Aristotelian viewpoint, partially because it's been a LONG time since I have read the Ethics, but C.S. Lewis does comment on this a little bit in Mere Christianity, saying that there must be some ethical principles found in nature, because while every culture may have a different moral code, there are still foundations to those moral codes that are similar. One example he used was that complete selfishness is not honored in any society- some societies may say that you ought to only be unselfish to your family while others may say you should be unselfish towards everyone, but no culture admires a person solely looking out for himself at the expense of everyone else.
I was also thinking about the question of "ought" versus "is" argument- that ethical behavior cannot be a natural law, because the laws of nature describe what actually occurs, whereas ethical law describes what ought to occur. I wondered, if ethics really are natural laws, then whether ethical behavior really is an "is" for humans- humans by nature do behave a certain way, but that the unnatural event of the fall and the fact that we are made with the ability to choose, as opposed to a stone that follows the law of gravity no matter what, allows us to be frequently acting against nature and against the laws of humanity that should be just as binding on us as other laws of nature are on other objects.
Interesting article, Robert, although there are some frightening statements in it, like the claims about the "neural basis of moral reasoning."
Post a Comment