BLOCK – 4

UNIT - 1

NATURAL MORAL LAW:

HUMAN ORDER AND MORAL ORDER:

Quest: What is the foundation of moral order? Explain.

Ans. The word ‘moral order’ implies ‘the totality of moral values’.  The crucial question related to ‘moral order’ is this that whether it is subjective or objective to decide the moral values? Whether it is based on the perception of the individual or based on the objective reality? Whether the basis or foundations of moral values are based on some reality? 

It includes two questions: whether is in fact such a foundation on which moral values should be established, and whether it is ‘right’ to base the values on it.  Further, there will be another question of context and its generality. Whether the same norm is applicable in all situations? And whether it is applicable for all persons? At the same time, it is difficult to decide, what is the moral value in a given situation?

Ideal human behaviour is that which is a according to a certain norm or as it ought to be. A ‘moral ideal’ is a ‘moral value’. As ‘value’ is related to some specific issue, it is used in plural.  It is specific actions which are decided as ‘good or ‘bad’. Any human person who does good acts, is said to be good person.

Quest: Natural law theory (June-2012 , 100 words)

THE DATA OF MORAL CONSCIOUSNESS:

Quest: Relate ‘moral consciousness’ and ‘human relatedness’ in society (Dec-2011, 150 words)

Quest: Explain ‘moral objectivism’ (Dec-2011, 150 words)

Quest: What is ‘moral objectivism? (June-2011,150 words)

Ans. The fundamental principle of ethics is that there are certain acts to be done and certain others to be avoided. This is the most primary principle of ethics.  Therefore, it needs a detail description and explanation. 

       But the real problem is how to decide this that which one is ‘good’ action and which one is ‘bad’ one. Whether it is decided by the parental influence or education or social environment etc.

       Among ‘good actions’ some actions are to be done necessary while others are to be performed only on certain conditions.  Another category of actions is left to the wish and will of the agent, though if performed, receives appreciation and reward.

       The first category of action which is to be done with the sense of absolute should is not to be decided subjectively.  It is in a sense obligation to do it, therefore, it is objectively determined.  This ‘absolute should’ has an universal appeal which we feel while deciding any action that it should be applied to every person. Though we cannot pinpoint which actions are universally obligatory but this universality is implied in moral consciousness like any objective reality.

       Another standard of moral consciousness is that which is ‘right’. That which is ‘right’ should be done.  This ‘right’ enforces the agent because of its being an ultimate end. But this ‘right’ act should be done with good motive as well.

       Another data of moral consciousness is the sense of ‘satisfaction’ while doing any ‘right’ act and sense of ‘guilt’ while doing any wrong act.  And this realization must not be affected by the praise or blame incurring that act. Because, this praise or blame is almost always based on the perception of the person

HUMAN ORDER AND MORAL ORDER:

Quest:  What are the ethical foundations? Discuss their importance in our life (June-2013, 500 words)

Ans.  Human inter-relatedness is ontological foundation of the moral obligation. Whereas, human person as a social being, is the norm for moral good.  The only moral precept that is self-evident is that human person should be human. So, all other precepts are based on this fundamental precept i.e. a person should realize himself as human, and natural outcome of this precept.

       Human consciousness is in the transition period.  His self-awareness is increasing and he is more grounded in morality. By going through continuous self analysis of his own existence, he is trying to search himself.  His consciousness of himself grows with his growth. And since moral consciousness is a part of self-consciousness, he becomes more morally conscious with his growth. From this self-consciousness emerges the moral precepts, as he thinks what he should be.

       Moral precepts are the natural corollary of the fundamental moral precept that human person should be himself.  Or we can say that moral precepts are the offshoot of the first fundamental precept.  This relation of moral precepts to the fundamental precepts is not the logical one.  Though on the level of the ideas these are logically related yet this relation is a type of continuously evolving process of human existence. Radical transformation has taken place from the primitive age of cannibalism to the contemporary age of universal declaration of human rights by United Nations General Assembly. 

       Though it is true that unreasonable customs spread ignorance of the moral precepts yet it is not the accurate description of the human being in general.  Human   historicity is the basis of this ignorance and variety of moral precepts. By the historical progressive development of his moral consciousness this ignorance and variety of morals can be defined. May be so that this development was not smooth and linear but screwed as well.The question, whether human person has gained his self and moral consciousness may be answered negatively because of some moral problems like abortion, women’s denigration etc.  Still women are not being treated as full human persons.  Whether fetuses should be considered as a human person is still being debated.  So many other problems like this indicate that still there is scope for progress and it will take its own time to complete this journey.         

Human Relatedness in Society:  Most of our actions are related to our relations in society. There are certain other actions which are related to men themselves, to God or to animals etc.  Actions related to God imply religious values, something different from moral values.  Whereas actions related to animals may be considered as moral or immoral one.  Actions related to oneself, are more difficult to decide as moral or immoral because this type of actions don’t affect others except the doer.  But after showing the impact of these actions on others, it can be as ascertained, good or bad. Human being, though a part of the whole human species, exists on his own right. Human person is essentially related to other human beings.  This relationality of human being is his essence.  The awareness of human being of this person hood makes him a socially responsible person. Known by human person and is self evident. 

       “Social dimension” is an integral part of human person’s personhood. It is this inter-relatedness which is termed as ‘human order’. To be recognised as a human person is the fundamental right of every human being. At the same time to recognise others as human beings is the duty of every human being, as well.

       Every theistic philosopher will  consider  God the foundation of  this human order, as well as moral order. St. Thomas holds this view and says that this human order is intuitively known by human person and is self – evident. Ontologically also, it is human nature to become related to each other.

EXISTENTIALIST HUMANISM:

Quest: Described Jean Paul Sartre’s existentialist humanism. (June-2014, 250 words)

Ans. Jean Paul Sartre, an existentialist humanist tried to find out the solution for objective moral norm on the basis of ontology.  The crux of moral philosophy is the question: is there a same foundation - an objective reality – which does in fact serve as a basis, or foundation, for moral values irrespective of their divergence and variability? For Sartre, the objective foundation could only be a ‘realism of essences’ created by God.  But, according to him, God does not exist.

       He says that in the absence of any pre-existing essence, to build any moral order and also there is not any norm on the basis of which anybody can pass moral judgement, the very agent is free to create his own moral values.  Sartre is not against the universal form of Ethics but he says that this universal form is based on human freedom itself.

       Sartre denies his philosophy being inhuman.Since, it promotes the human freedom and dignity as well it is much more humanism than any other philosophy.  He says that while behaving freely by one’s own freedom, one should not ignore the freedom of others.  Since there does not exist any God to decide the norm, human person finds himself cursed to be free and thrown in this world of passion.  He is anguished by this freedom and disappointed to be free.

       But  human person for itself is rather from a thing. Human person is dynamic, undetermined and indefinable as opposed to the thing which is static, fixed, determined and definable. With some pre-existing norms to determine him, human person also  would have been like thing and devoid of his dignity.  It is his existence as free being which makes his essence.  That’s why he says that existence precedes essence. It is possible for human person to proceed forward from his existing situation.  This is possible because of his being a conscience being.  The concept of God which includes both the ‘in-itself’ and ‘for itself’ is contradictory, according to Sartre. It is obvious that his ethical doctrine is determined by his ontology. Hence, his atheism plays crucial role in the description of ethical theories.

       The universality which lies in the ethical norm is the universality of human freedom. So, he says that, a person who does not   recognize his freedom and tries to find excuses for his decisions is a salaud (bastard).  Every human person is free to invent his own moral value.  So, human person is synonymous   with human freedom for Sartre. Every human person is free to make himself what he wants to be.

       According to critics, this freedom may lead to anarchism, is assessed from the practical point of view.  Giving too much emphasis on the dynamic nature of human being and ignoring his ontological essence would lead to logical absurdity.  Since, moral values are based on human person himself; ignoring his noumnal reality which is static would give only one sided view.

Q1. What do you understand by the ‘Absolute Should’?

Ans. the data

Q2. How do I understand moral ideal is a moral value?

Q3. “Human person should invent his own values”-explain with Sartre’s idea.

Q4. For Sartre, why does existence precede essence?

Q5. Explain the idea of human freedom for Sartre.

Ans. EXISTENTIALIST HUMANISM:

Quest: Described Jean Paul Sartre’s existentialist humanism. (June-2014, 250 words)

Ans. Jean Paul Sartre, an existentialist humanist tried to find out the solution for objective moral norm on the basis of ontology.  The crux of moral philosophy is the question: is there a same foundation - an objective reality – which does in fact serve as a basis, or foundation, for moral values irrespective of their divergence and variability? For Sartre, the objective foundation could only be a ‘realism of essences’ created by God.  But, according to him, God does not exist.

       He says that in the absence of any pre-existing essence, to build any moral order and also there is not any norm on the basis of which anybody can pass moral judgement, the very agent is free to create his own moral values.  Sartre is not against the universal form of Ethics but he says that this universal form is based on human freedom itself.

       Sartre denies his philosophy being inhuman.Since, it promotes the human freedom and dignity as well it is much more humanism than any other philosophy.  He says that while behaving freely by one’s own freedom, one should not ignore the freedom of others.  Since there does not exist any God to decide the norm, human person finds himself cursed to be free and thrown in this world of passion.  He is anguished by this freedom and disappointed to be free.

       But  human person for itself is rather from a thing. Human person is dynamic, undetermined and indefinable as opposed to the thing which is static, fixed, determined and definable. With some pre-existing norms to determine him, human person also  would have been like thing and devoid of his dignity.  It is his existence as free being which makes his essence.  That’s why he says that existence precedes essence. It is possible for human person to proceed forward from his existing situation.  This is possible because of his being a conscience being.  The concept of God which includes both the ‘in-itself’ and ‘for itself’ is contradictory, according to Sartre. It is obvious that his ethical doctrine is determined by his ontology. Hence, his atheism plays crucial role in the description of ethical theories.

       The universality which lies in the ethical norm is the universality of human freedom. So, he says that, a person who does not   recognize his freedom and tries to find excuses for his decisions is a salaud (bastard).  Every human person is free to invent his own moral value.  So, human person is synonymous   with human freedom for Sartre. Every human person is free to make himself what he wants to be.

       According to critics, this freedom may lead to anarchism, is assessed from the practical point of view.  Giving too much emphasis on the dynamic nature of human being and ignoring his ontological essence would lead to logical absurdity.  Since, moral values are based on human person himself; ignoring his noumnal reality which is static would give only one sided view.

Q6. What is human order?

Ans. HUMAN ORDER AND MORAL ORDER:

Quest: What is the foundation of moral order? Explain.

Ans. The word ‘moral order’ implies ‘the totality of moral values’.  The crucial question related to ‘moral order’ is this that whether it is subjective or objective to decide the moral values? Whether it is based on the perception of the individual or based on the objective reality? Whether the basis or foundations of moral values are based on some reality? 

It includes two questions: whether is in fact such a foundation on which moral values should be established, and whether it is ‘right’ to base the values on it.  Further, there will be another question of context and its generality. Whether the same norm is applicable in all situations? And whether it is applicable for all persons? At the same time, it is difficult to decide, what is the moral value in a given situation?

Ideal human behaviour is that which is a according to a certain norm or as it ought to be. A ‘moral ideal’ is a ‘moral value’. As ‘value’ is related to some specific issue, it is used in plural.  It is specific actions which are decided as ‘good or ‘bad’. Any human person who does good acts, is said to be good person.