Collectivity, evil and the dynamics of moral value

Felsefe Arkivi - Archives of Philosophy, 2018

The issue of conscience and authority has long been on the agenda of moral philosophy. In particular, the views of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes came to the fore when there was freedom of religion and conscience. Their views continue to influence the moral philosophers of today's world. In terms of organizing and maintaining individual and social relationships, different perspectives from past to present have been made possible by taking into account the common life practices. In today's world, the social configurations that have changed compared to the past and the problems arising from the encounter of different ethnic and social groups have caused re-emergence of solidarity in a common theme. The concept of cultural relativism, which is one of these common themes, refers to the evaluation of exposed judgments within the internal dynamics of culture. On the other hand, shaping of universal human rights and social solidarity on an intercultural ground makes the existence of an additional theme inevitable in terms of harmony and sustainability: conscience. Conscience is related to the commonization of the common living commitments and being in solidarity in sustaining social relations. Predicating the relations to be formed on the basis of conscience upon an essentialist foundation does not run parallel to the continuous reshaping of solidarity in practical life. In the absence of essentialist truths, and outside the original ethnic relativity, a new and sustainable togetherness starts to be shaped within these practices. Therefore, one of the themes that will spring to mind will be the values education. There are studies that include the answers given to the questions that come to mind about the theoretical possibilities of this and the determination and interpretation of the values already positioned in the practical structures.

Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 2012

EMBERS OF LIBERAL SOCIETIES respect conscience. They generally consider it wrong to force another to do something she thinks is morally odious. John Rawls asserts, "the question of equal liberty of conscience is settled. It is one of the fixed points of our considered judgments of justice " (1971: 206). In this paper, we attempt to explain why liberty of conscience is a fixed point, or, why conscience has normative significance. Our answer, which draws on the resources of the contractualist tradition in moral philosophy, is not only of interest in its own right, but also clarifies a number of practical questions concerning the legal protection of conscience. We begin in section 1 by developing a definition of conscience and explaining what it means to violate conscience. In section 2, we criticize three attempts to explain the normative significance of conscience, including Martha Nussbaum's recent defense. In section 3, we develop a contractualist explanation of the normative significance of conscience that we believe can remedy the defects in the accounts assessed in section 2 and ground a norm of respect for conscience. In section 4, we conclude.

The aim of the paper is to show that moral reasoning is not really reasoning in the sense usually assumed in moral philosophy. Instead, moral reasoning is one aspect of repressing conscience. The formal dimensions of moral reasoning function as a repressive depersonalisation of our sense of being an I who stands in a relationship to a you. For instance, “moral principle” invokes a formal and hence impersonal understanding of a moral problem. The thinking person loses her sense of being a particular person related to another particular person and focuses instead on the moral principles with their inherent, systematic implications. However, and as I will show in connection to so-called moral dilemmas, the thinking person does not actually act in the rational manner that is presupposed by reasoning. Instead, moral reasoning will reveal itself as a discourse for repressing conscience. Part of the aim of the paper is to show that, contrary to what is generally assumed, repression is a morally related phenomenon that arises as a result of a person’s difficulties with acknowledging the character of a moral difficulty; an acknowledgement that is an essential aspect of moral understanding.

Georgetown University-Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, 2015

Moral reasons are considerations that count in favor of or against actions in light of a moral standard. They can be functionally defined as authoritative guides to morally right action. Embedded in this concept is a deep tension between the two features that account for moral reasons having this unique function: namely, practicality and objectivity. On the one hand, in order for a consideration to be objective, as a conceptual matter, it must be mind independent. On the other hand, in order for a consideration to be practical, as a conceptual matter, it must be mind dependent. Since no consideration can be both mind dependent and mind independent, no consideration could be a moral reason, on the innocent functional analysis. I call this the puzzle about moral reasons. The going solutions to the puzzle require conceptual revision, foregoing the idea that moral reasons are, as a conceptual matter, either practical or objective. This dissertation defends a solution to the puzzle that ...

Philosophy, 2009

The ultimate aim of this essay is to suggest that conscience is a very important part of human psychology and of our moral point of view, not something that can be dismissed as merely ‘a part of Christian theology’. The essay begins with discussions of what might be regarded as the two most influential functional models of conscience, the classical Christian account of conscience and the Freudian account of conscience. Then, using some insights from these models, and from some comparatively recent work in psychology and especially psychiatry, the author argues for a quite different model of conscience that might be called the personal integrity account of conscience.

Milton Quarterly, 2021

International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 2018

This article challenges the individualism and neutrality of modern moral conscience. It looks to the history of the concept to excavate an older tradition that takes conscience to be social and morally responsive, while arguing that dominant contemporary justifications of conscience in terms of integrity are inadequate without reintroducing these social and moral traits. This prompts a rethinking of the nature and value of conscience: first, by demonstrating that a morally-responsive conscience is neither a contradiction in terms nor a political absurdity; second, by suggesting how a morally-responsive conscience can be informed by the social world without being a mere proxy for social power or moribund tradition.

Attempting to rectify casuist and manualist theories of conscience, Catholic moral theology has since sought to quell the unnecessary conflict these theories have imposed between freedom and law. For such a dichotomy necessitated an errant understanding of conscience as that capacity by which one discerns and applies the dictates of natural law over and against human freedom. However, despite its attempt to offer a more holistic and “orthodox” conception of conscience, Catholic moral theology has often found itself bound by notions of “natural law” still indebted to the definitions and constructions of these very traditions. Following Herbert McCabe’s assessment, I wish to propose that Catholic moral theology’s reconciliation between law and freedom, though necessary, is misinformed in its present understanding of natural law as obligation. Examining the critique of conscience offered by the 1993 papal encyclical, Veritatis Splendor, might best elucidate this error. I will then argue that by reconceptualizing natural law anthropologically, McCabe is able to present a more robust theory of conscious that enables moral growth and opens the individual more fully to the community.