Warning: include(/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php') in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

My Frustration with Ethics

Ethics is at once my favourite and least liked area of inquiry, espe­cially ethics courses.  One such course was an ‘intro­duc­tory’ Bioethics course I took last year; a course which famil­iar­ized and focused on Util­i­tar­i­an­ism, Kant’s Cat­e­gor­i­cal Imper­a­tive, and Virtue Ethics in rela­tion to the ‘prob­lems’ of Bioethics. The prob­lem is that ethics as it’s cur­rently prac­ticed is impos­si­ble, and it frus­trates me. The result is that I’ve taken to read­ing books on ethics (and virtue) and the out­look looks fairly bleak.

It was a com­mon require­ment of my Bioethics course to exam­ine dif­fer­ent issues from the per­spec­tives of at least two moral the­o­ries. I usu­ally chose Util­i­tar­i­an­ism and Kant’s Cat­e­gor­i­cal Imper­a­tive (I think now I would run to Virtue Ethics first). The prob­lem that makes ethics impos­si­ble is that there doesn’t seem the pos­si­bil­ity of con­sen­sus — by this I mean progress, or one eth­i­cal for­mu­la­tion being supe­rior … (Read more)

The Myth of Moral Relativism

Peter Kreeft warns that rel­a­tivism is the sin­gle most impor­tant issue of our age; for the soci­ety that adopts rel­a­tivism, col­lapse is not too far behind. The ques­tion is then why has the West adopted, by and large, this phi­los­o­phy of rel­a­tivism? The rea­son, says Allan Bloom, is that “the rel­a­tiv­ity of truth is not a the­o­ret­i­cal insight but a moral pos­tu­late, the con­di­tion of a free soci­ety, or so they see it.… Rel­a­tivism is nec­es­sary to open­ness; and this is the virtue, the only virtue, which all pri­mary edu­ca­tion for more than fifty years has ded­i­cated itself to incul­cat­ing. Open­ness — and the rel­a­tivism that makes it the only plau­si­ble stance in the face var­i­ous ways of life and kinds of human beings — is the great insight of our times“1. Tol­er­ance nec­es­sar­ily requires moral relativism.

As my title would sug­gest, I believe there is a sig­nif­i­cant … (Read more)

Morality as a fiction

Over the past cou­ple of days I’ve been writ­ing a post on rel­a­tive and absolute moral­ity (and it’s been very slow in com­ing, I’m hav­ing some dif­fi­culty writ­ing it… Or in want­ing to write it) and I encoun­tered the fol­low­ing quote by Mus­solini which I thought was very inter­est­ing (it was brought to my atten­tion by Peter Kreeft in one of this lec­tures). In any case, I don’t think rel­a­tivism nec­es­sar­ily leads to fas­cism (though I imag­ine if not fas­cism then some­thing equally worse), how­ever, Mussolini’s words should still worry us.

Every­thing I have said and done is these last years is rel­a­tivism, by intu­ition. From the fact that all ide­olo­gies are of equal value, that all ide­olo­gies are mere fic­tions, the mod­ern rel­a­tivist infers that every­body has the right to cre­ate for him­self his own ide­ol­ogy, and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he … (Read more)