How did ethics come into being? What is right and wrong? How do we decide the morality of an action?
Philosophical Brain-busting - a magazine on philosophy from the perspective of youth! (Read more below or head over to https://goo.gl/D6iIOC)
Argument from egoism
This broad category of ethical schools of thought has a firm opinion that ethics are derived from one's own selfish needs and cooperation can eventually be reduced to one's self-centered motives. Every man at length must decide the morality of an action based on his own interests. This philosophy is also seen promoted in ancient India by Carvaka. Since this world becomes irrelevant after one's death, one must 'enjoy' it to the fullest till one can, is dictated by this school of thought. ''Celebrate a festival even if it may be by borrowing money" falls into this ideal. Every social transaction is viewed in a reductionist self-motivated point of view in this school. In a gist, the world revolves around this entity called "I" or "me'', the ego.
In the famous dilemma from the Mahabharata, Arjuna must decide whether or not participate in the war. Winning the war would have yielded him a Kingdom -- Hastinapura, and all the joys and comforts in the world! It was an obvious choice, some would say. However, the enemy was none other than his own blood relations. Arjuna said "I do not wish to hurt these people even if it results in my death. Even if the reward were the entire world I would not change my stance." Saying this, Arjuna instantly rejected this school of thought. The thought Arjuna rejected is the one that most people today would identify as the lowermost level in ethics. It is obvious from experience that this cannot be applied as the philosophy for everyday life. If one comes in the path of someone else's comfort, it proves to be detrimental to one another. It is impossible to gain comfort and mutual benefit without a accommodative compromise.
Argument for social compromise
As opposed to the previous school of thought which questioned the need of ethics, this school of thought deems ethics necessary for self survival. Ethics begin in this thought -- "If I hurt other people, I will be hurt by them and thus I will lose my comfort which, in turn, is why I must follow an `ethical code' which is essentially this social understanding of cooperation.'' The origin of this ethical code, however, is within the fear of losing one's comfort(s). This school gives an explanation for feeling sympathy as 'we feel afraid that we might land in this situation'. We picture ourselves in that position and see a painful picture which makes us feel sad. It is not out of any care for the other person actually in that situation. In this manner, we can visualize the so-called values like cooperation, care, humility, respect, philanthropy, friendship and so on as indirectly contributing to our comfort and as ways of avoiding possible pain to ourselves. For instance, we care for other people so that they reciprocate the same feeling with regards to us. Even if we don't expect reciprocation, in the least we do expect recognition and appreciation of our actions, for it comforts our pride. A parent raises his/her child so that the child extends care to the parent and remains a close acquaintance forever. Summing up, this school advocates certain ethics. Even if they may be for one's own selfish requirements, after all the social structure works.
This thought does extend the ethical consideration further. However, it is an indirect form of the first school of thought itself. It is known that the so-called 'values' are not entirely self-motive driven, but are in various amounts inherently present in the form we call 'human nature'.
Read about ethics from natural instinct, ethics of the number and more on this month's theme -- "Ethics" -- in Philosophical Brain-busting - a magazine on philosophy from the perspective of youth!
Edition 1 (English+Marathi): Read now at https://goo.gl/D6iIOC
Published on
Agrahayan 1, Saka 1938
November 22, 2016
Visit our Facebook page!
Philosophical Brain-busting - a magazine on philosophy from the perspective of youth! (Read more below or head over to https://goo.gl/D6iIOC)
 | |||
| Info-graphic on ethics |
Argument from egoism
This broad category of ethical schools of thought has a firm opinion that ethics are derived from one's own selfish needs and cooperation can eventually be reduced to one's self-centered motives. Every man at length must decide the morality of an action based on his own interests. This philosophy is also seen promoted in ancient India by Carvaka. Since this world becomes irrelevant after one's death, one must 'enjoy' it to the fullest till one can, is dictated by this school of thought. ''Celebrate a festival even if it may be by borrowing money" falls into this ideal. Every social transaction is viewed in a reductionist self-motivated point of view in this school. In a gist, the world revolves around this entity called "I" or "me'', the ego.
In the famous dilemma from the Mahabharata, Arjuna must decide whether or not participate in the war. Winning the war would have yielded him a Kingdom -- Hastinapura, and all the joys and comforts in the world! It was an obvious choice, some would say. However, the enemy was none other than his own blood relations. Arjuna said "I do not wish to hurt these people even if it results in my death. Even if the reward were the entire world I would not change my stance." Saying this, Arjuna instantly rejected this school of thought. The thought Arjuna rejected is the one that most people today would identify as the lowermost level in ethics. It is obvious from experience that this cannot be applied as the philosophy for everyday life. If one comes in the path of someone else's comfort, it proves to be detrimental to one another. It is impossible to gain comfort and mutual benefit without a accommodative compromise.
Argument for social compromise
As opposed to the previous school of thought which questioned the need of ethics, this school of thought deems ethics necessary for self survival. Ethics begin in this thought -- "If I hurt other people, I will be hurt by them and thus I will lose my comfort which, in turn, is why I must follow an `ethical code' which is essentially this social understanding of cooperation.'' The origin of this ethical code, however, is within the fear of losing one's comfort(s). This school gives an explanation for feeling sympathy as 'we feel afraid that we might land in this situation'. We picture ourselves in that position and see a painful picture which makes us feel sad. It is not out of any care for the other person actually in that situation. In this manner, we can visualize the so-called values like cooperation, care, humility, respect, philanthropy, friendship and so on as indirectly contributing to our comfort and as ways of avoiding possible pain to ourselves. For instance, we care for other people so that they reciprocate the same feeling with regards to us. Even if we don't expect reciprocation, in the least we do expect recognition and appreciation of our actions, for it comforts our pride. A parent raises his/her child so that the child extends care to the parent and remains a close acquaintance forever. Summing up, this school advocates certain ethics. Even if they may be for one's own selfish requirements, after all the social structure works.
This thought does extend the ethical consideration further. However, it is an indirect form of the first school of thought itself. It is known that the so-called 'values' are not entirely self-motive driven, but are in various amounts inherently present in the form we call 'human nature'.
Read about ethics from natural instinct, ethics of the number and more on this month's theme -- "Ethics" -- in Philosophical Brain-busting - a magazine on philosophy from the perspective of youth!
Edition 1 (English+Marathi): Read now at https://goo.gl/D6iIOC
Published on
Agrahayan 1, Saka 1938
November 22, 2016
Visit our Facebook page!
No comments:
Post a Comment