What does it mean to act morally - Term Paper Example

?Moral Philosophy: What does it mean to act morally? Introduction Morality is the system through which people determine right and wrong conduct. Religion has a vital role to play in moral philosophy. Divine command theory is widely used for describing the moral judgments which are made based on religious abstracts. However the above theory contains sever flaws. Piaget’s, 1975, and Haidt’s, 1978, theories are based on psychology and analytical reasoning. These theories provide the scientific background required for analyzing the moral issues. The current study proposes an integrated approach for evaluating the moral issues in contemporary societies. The proposed model adopts theories of Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism but it is largely based on the Buddhist philosophy of enlightenment. Analysis on Existing Theories of Moral Philosophy Sense of “morality” occurs naturally in human mind. Pursuing private benefits and ignoring the wellbeing of other living beings are also natural human behaviors. Conflicting mortal forces of “morality” and “immorality” are responsible for a great amount of literature in the human history. Lord Buddha taught 2600 years ago that correctly comprehending these forces is the path way to the ultimate freedom of humans. Theology play a vital role in moral philosophy. However the divine command theory is inefficient in describing the religion lead morality. It acknowledges the significance of religion in moral philosophy. But it is based on a rather ambiguous presumption i.e. “there exists a God”. Accordingly God defines what is good and what is bad. Approximately 2500 years ago Plato questioned: “is something right (or wrong) because the gods command it, or do the gods commands it because it is right?” Religion lead morality had been much easier to widely implement during the pre-industrial revolution. In the history fear and faith towards religious abstracts kept humans from acting upon immoral desires. In the modern societies however fear for supernatural powers is minimum. Advancement of technologies has vastly decreased the individuals’ dependency on religions for their wellbeing. People now question “why do we have to care for the others?” They demand a comprehensible reason to act morally. Thus the divine command theory is not an efficient approach for contemporary moral philosophy. Psychology is acknowledged as a vital component in moral philosophy. There are many theories advocated by the psychologists relating to the moral judgment example: Piaget’s “genetic Epistemology” and Haidt’s “social-intuitionist” theory (Bucciarelli et. al., 2008). Piaget, 1975, described the cognitive development process of children in terms of their biological makeup and psychological process involving adaptation and organization. When a new situation is presented to a child it becomes assimilated and accommodated in memory. These two processes jointly results in adaptation to the new situation. Creating structures of related and interconnected information is a natural process occurring in human minds (known as organization in Piaget’s theory). Thus when the same situation is presented repeatedly child reacts according to what is already been assimilated and accommodated. According to Piaget’s theory logical reasoning is the aftermath of adaptation and organization. Haidt, 1978, described “immediate intuition” as the judicable basis for identifying what is right and what is wrong. Haidt’s theory postulates that conscious reasoning of humans is not effective for identifying what is right or wrong. Alternatively it is vital for influencing the actions of others. Haidt’s theory defines immediate intuition as “the sudden appearance in consciousness of a moral judgment, including an affective valence (good-bad, like-dislike), without any conscious awareness of having gone through steps of searching, weighing evidence, or inferring a conclusion” (Haidt, 2001, p. 818). Limitation of Haidt’s above definition is discussed in the proceeding section on Integrated Approach for Contemporary Moral Philosophy. Psychological Egoism concern the human desire which is centered upon the wellbeing of “thy”. It states, every individual pursue wellbeing of themselves and it is a naturally occurring desire in human mind. Psychological Egoism is valid in many cases. However it does not explain the self destructive human impulses such as suicide. Ethical Egoism is the normative approach for private wellbeing. It urges individuals to pursue the wellbeing of “them-selves” exclusively. Human rights Acts and prohibiting suicide by national and international laws can be named as the empirical applications of ethical egoism. Rachels, 2002, described that ethical egoism creates two spheres in morality, namely, you and the rest of the world. The above critique is invalid based on the following argument. Ethical Egoism theory does discourage helping the other living beings. It concerns the wellbeing of “thy” only. Ethical egoism is limited in application to the moral philosophy however is not contradicting. Evaluation of the Moral Philosophy Theories Problems relating to the above theories are summarized below. Firstly, divine command theory is inefficient for creating morality in contemporary human societies. Basis of the above theory is an ambiguous presumption i.e. existence of God. It also lacks a robust framework for evaluating the moral issues. Proposed approach for the moral philosophy in here has thus abstracted the divine command theory. Secondly, Piaget, 1975, and Haidt, 1978, presented scientific buttress required for evaluating the moral issues. These theories integrate the knowledge gained from scientific experiments and psychology. However Haidt’s approach for evaluating the moral issues is also not accepted in the current study. Haidt’s theory identifies “immediate intuition” as the indicator of morality of a given issue. Further he describes “immediate intuition” as the “sudden appearance in consciousness of a moral judgment” Haidt’s theory postulates accepting an unconsciously formulated judgment regarding the moral issues. According to Haidt the immediate intuition does not involve the steps of “searching, weighing evidence, or inferring a conclusion.” Recent scientific findings however reveals that unconscious judgments made by the human mind are strongly correlated with the previous experiences of individuals. And hence unconsciously human mind go through the steps of searching, weighing evidence, or inferring a conclusion before a moral judgment is appeared in consciousness. Thus Haidt’s approach for an “unprocessed” moral is erroneous. Furthermore such unconsciously formulated judgments can be highly vague, subjective and unacceptable universally. Thus the current study has abstracted Haidt’s theory on evaluating moral issues. Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism are not erroneous. However these disciplines contain limitations as described in the previous section. Therefore the above theories are used in combine with the Buddhist philosophy for developing the integrated moral philosophy. Integrated Approach for Contemporary Moral Philosophy Buddhist philosophy contains an alternative approach for evaluating the moral issues. In essence individuals are ought to perceive the wellbeing of every living being as equally important to the wellbeing of thy. Buddhist definition for every living being includes all forms of living i.e born/unborn, visible/invisible, thin/fat/medium etc. Letting go of the personal desires is taught as the pathway to attain the ultimate wellbeing of all the human beings. First step of acting morally is to exert loving kindness towards thy. Individuals are required to obtain nutrition, clothing, shelter, medicine and such actions required for their wellbeing. They must also detain from such actions that affect the physical and/or psychological wellbeing of thy. Next step is to act morally towards the other individuals. Similar to thy others in the society seek to attain the wellbeing for them-selves. If an individual obstruct another individual from attaining wellbeing example: cheating, lying, stealing etc. it is considered immoral. Karma or the actions of past determines the endowment of comforts to each individual’s life. Good karma (moral conduct) results in prosperous fate while bad karma (immoral conduct) results in ill fate. According to the karma concept individual along is responsible for the ill fate they may be experiencing. Thus it is irrational to hate, envy and/or deprive the other individuals from their comforts. Lord Buddha taught that individuals act immorally due lack of wisdom. Wisdom is subjective. Thus every individual in the society is not expected “act equally moral”. The Buddhist approach regarding “acting morally” is thus flawless and undeniable. The third step is to contribute to improving the physical and/or psychological wellbeing of others in the society. Fourth step is to extend the boundaries of altruistic notions towards the entire universe. Conclusion Widely held moral philosophy is bewildering and incomplete. Psychological Egoism theory describes the natural tendency humans have for attaining the individual wellbeing. And Ethical Egoism theory describes individuals are ought to pursue personal interests. However these theories are limited in application to the moral philosophy. They fail to describe why altruistic human emotions such as compassion, loving kindness, benevolence, empathy, and yearning are required to the society. Therefore an integrated approach is introduced based on the Buddhism. Accordingly karma defines the overall wellbeing of individuals. Ultimate wellbeing of thy, depends on the amount of good karma one has performed. Hence individuals are ought to act morally towards the entire universe in an attempt to pursue private wellbeing. References Bucciarelli, M. and Khemlani, S. and Johnson-Laird P. N. (2008). The psychology of moral reasoning. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(2), 121–139 Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998–1002. Piaget, J. (1975/1932). The child's conception of the world. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams Rachels J. (2002). The elements of moral philosophy (4th ed.). New York, NY:McGraw-Hill Read More