Moral and Ethics in Philosophy - Literature review Example

?Moral and Ethics The mind–body problem is an important aspect in philosophy, which seeks to understand the relationship between the mind and body. The problem has been studied expansively by philosophers among them, Rene Descartes. The entire philosophical aspect of the mind-body problem has been greatly attributed to him. He brought out the different aspects of the body and the mind and from this; the modern philosophers built their theories. The mind-body problem according to Descartes the human bodies were likened to machinery that worked on their own rules taking no lead from anything else. This he explained giving an example of the involuntary actions that make the body get into action. He pointed out the reflex action of a human being could not have included the mind since the external stimuli activate the nerve ending of the body and force them to act (Broughton and Carriero 19). However, although the body was free, there were situations where the mind worked as a lever exerting pressure on the body to make it bend to the demands of the mind. According to Descartes, the body was physical, could be influenced by other material properties while the mind was non-physical, and, therefore, did not fall prey of any natural laws (Broughton and Carriero 24). Rene attributed the interaction of the body and the mind to the pineal gland found in the brain, as this is not duplicated in the other side of the brain and, therefore, provided a unifying factor in the interaction. He believed this interaction made it possible for the mind to exert influence over the body and make it act in a certain way. He also stated that the body was also capable of influencing the mind, which is rather rational, and forcing it into action through an act of passion. Following the assertions made by Descartes, Hobbes disagreed on the aspect of the immaterial mind and sates that the mind is made up of sense, imagination, and the working of language and it does not consist of any other rational characteristic other than these (Marmysz 180). According to Hobbes, all the ideas that human beings experience are resultant from our senses directly or indirectly, he explains how our thoughts work through the formation of ideas and a comprehensive look at sensations and the workings of imagination. Hobbes denies the existence of an immaterial mind and attempts to solve the mind-body problem through the philosophy of language. Hobbes attempts to solve the problem led him to come up with the signification theory, where he explains that, for example, in naming man introduces a mark in his mind to bring a conception concerning the item on which it is imposed to help him in the association process. He, therefore, states that naming is a way of putting marks on the memory (Marmysz 180). In his works, he states that aspects of language are arbitrary and conventional, through this he fails to explain how then the marks for memory used in naming are able to be constant with different languages as Descartes pointed out when countering Hobbes views (Broughton and Carriero 18). The most plausible approach is that of Rene Descartes who views the mind and the body being different. This is because of the reflex theory, which he used to show the ‘mechanism’ of the human body. It also explains why a reasonable man can be detached from his rationale mind and act in passion and later end up regretting his actions. Ruth Benedict was an anthropologist who stated that morality is fully dependent on cultures and traditions from the community one comes from or in which one is born. Through this premise, she became part of the scholars who supported moral relativism (Ambrose and Cross 152). As so, she further states that there is no existence of a transcendent culture, and that makes what could be wrong in one culture, correct in another culture. Benedicts found that many traditional societies were focused on community-centered values since they did not interact much with people from other cultures. This meant that in the event that they met an abnormal act they, as a community, did not approve, then the act would be immoral hence the moral relativity. Conversely, the notion held by Bentham on morality or ethics is that moral judgment should be based on the collective good of the consequences of the acts committed. This notion forms the premise on which utilitarianism is founded upon. According to Bentham, people are guided by moral values to make choices; an aspect that motivates people to make moral sound choices is the imposition of sanctions by societies. Mill, who fully agreed with him, however, made some improvements on the theory and claimed that happiness could not be quantified and therefore that happiness is relative. He proposes that the best thing for humans to do is to work toward reducing the amount of pain that one can go through for the good of many people. The criticisms against Benedicts moral relativity brought about by the theory of utilitarianism points out that difference on the moral values of a place are not caused by the difference in fundamental principles but rather by the need to same values in different ways that correspond with their situations (Ambrose and Cross 154). Another criticism that arises against the moral relativism is the lack of a social consensus on moral opinion. This has been explained by the fact that, in moral relativism, the persons in a given cultural society must follow the morality correct acts of the society even though they include doing something morally wrong. This means even when individuals have different opinions about a certain act they cannot speak out against it since the act is already accepted in that particular society. According to philosophers against moral relativism, this level of social conformity leaves little room for moral improvement in any society (Ambrose and Cross 162). In light of these criticisms, I think Benedict’s notion on moral relativism cannot withstand the challenges brought forth by utilitarianism; although over the years as trade and commerce has opened up channels for communication and transmission of cultures people still use the ‘first’ cultural teaching to make moral decisions. This, therefore, means that morality remains relative across different cultures. However, one of the major criticisms of moral relativism that projects the existence of some universal moral standards give an example of people against slavery in pre civil war era in the United States of America or the practice of apartheid that was experienced in South Africa. This nullifies the premise of moral relativism that there does not exist a universal moral standard. Works Cited Ambrose, Don, and Tracy Cross. Morality, Ethics, and Gifted Minds, 2009. Boston: Springer. Print. Broughton, Janet, and John Carriero (eds.). A Companion to Descartes, 2007. Oxford: Blackwell. Print. Marmysz, John. The Path of Philosophy: Truth, Wonder, and Distress, 2011. London: Cengage Learning. Print. Read More