|
XII. Personal
Conduct and Moral Values
Topics:
- A. The Science of Morality
- B. The problem of ends or aims
- C. Voluntary acts and Free acts
- D. Moral goodness of a human act
- E. Objective distinction between moral good
and evil
- F. Moral richness of an act
A. The Science of
Morality
The activity of man is characterized by
teleology, i.e., he desires certain things as ends,
and he wills other things a means to these ends. In
this, he resembles all other natural beings, which
are, as we have seen, endowed with this
teleological character. But whereas these others
tend towards their ends in virtue of certain
internal inclinations themselves unconscious and
not subject to control, man, being endowed with
reason and liberty, is master of his own conduct,
-- "master of the acts which lead towards his end"
[1]. The study of human conduct as directed
by us towards an end forms the subject matter of
Ethics or Moral Philosophy. The knowledge which we
thereby obtain is concerned with an order of things
of which we ourselves are the authors, and not
merely the spectators (XVIII, B). For our conduct
is our own work, and the resulting relations
between us and the universe in general are what we
ourselves make them.
Starting from facts duly observed, Moral
Philosophy discusses three general questions: the
end in view, the act whereby we seek to attain it,
and morality, or the relation of agreement or
suitability between the one and the other.
B. The problem of ends
or aims
It is a matter of common experience that our
conduct is motivated by different aims: riches,
honor, material pleasure, social positions, etc.
All these are desired as being good things, for the
only possible motive of action is our well-being,
and the suitability of things or actions in view
thereof. The good is that which all desire. Even a
man who commits suicide, in order to put an end to
some trouble or other, obeys the same law. Man's
nature is to will the good, and all
that is good. And when our knowledge puts us in
presence of an external reality or an action
"simply as desirable or suitable for us," we
necessarily will it, unless indeed we first
reflect, and as a result realize that "all is not
gold that glitters."
The good which constitutes the end we aim at is
always our own good. Nothing is more personal than
conduct, and the ends we aim at in our lives. If
the end be pleasure, fortune, or knowledge, it is
still our own pleasure, our fortune, our knowledge.
The end is a personal one, because man is an
individual substance. Of course, the well-being of
others enters as a motive of conduct, but it can
only be a secondary one. It will be seen below that
every human act is a social act,
which benefits or harms a community. The
realization of individual happiness is the sole
reason for living in society. Hence it is still for
our personal perfection that we care for the
well-being of others. For instance, those who aid
their neighbor see in their good work the
accomplishment of an act which their reason
approves, and which perfects them in their own
eyes.
The Schoolmen are so convinced of the personal
character of happiness that they raise the question
whether an act of disinterested love is possible,
even when God is the object. So that one could say
in general: we love ourselves in the first place
and others only secondarily.
Experience also teaches us that some ends are
subordinated to others, and that all have not the
same value. They are arranged in a hierarchical
order:
- I to on a particular voyage, in order to do
some business of a particular kind;
- this I want to do in order to make
money;
- this again I want that I may be my own
master, and so on.
An end which is subordinated to another, or is
useful, becomes a means. Now there must evidently
be a supreme end or aim which dominates and
underlies all the others. If not, I should never
desire anything at all, and should never go beyond
a mere platonic consideration of the possibilities
of action. But we do make actual decisions, and in
order to explain their actuality, there must be
some real end towards which they are directed.
Otherwise we should be led into an infinite
regression, which is as absurd [2] in this
connection as in the order of efficient causality
(XI, A). For, an infinite regress would render any
actual decision impossible; and, yet, particular
decisions or acts of will are facts. What is this
supreme end? We may say in the first place that it
is my whole good or my good in general. But such a
statement would be incomplete, for one would go on
to ask where this whole good or good in general is
to be found. Here we are confronted with the theory
of values. Concrete good things of many kinds lie
within our grasp:
- pleasures of the body and of the mind,
- good health,
- fortune,
- friendship, and so on.
All these correspond in a certain measure to our
aspirations, but it becomes necessary to draw up a
scale of their respective values, and this can only
be done by the reason. Now our reason tells us that
the truly human good ought to consist
in that which will satisfy our specifically human
aspirations, or, in other words, correspond to
those faculties which are the highest we possess,
and which make us human, namely intelligence and
will. Things other than the intellectual will be
good only as supplementary, so to speak, and as
controlled by reason [3].
The happiness which corresponds to our mode of
being will consist in knowing and
loving. To know in a perfect way, to
penetrate all the mysteries of the material
universe and to dominate it, and to know in
addition by means of His works the great Creator of
them all, God Himself; then to love in the same
perfect way, to delight in knowledge for its own
sake, and to cast ourselves towards God our
Creator, -- this will constitute philosophic
happiness.
Doubtless, the man who desires good as such,
perfect good, does not at once perceive that it is
God alone who can fully satisfy the aspirations of
his mind and heart. His reason arrives at this
conclusion by the gradual elimination of objects
other than God (XI, A, D). Until this process of
reasoning is performed, man seeks for happiness,
unaware that God is his happiness. "To perceive
that someone approaches is not to know Peter,
although Peter is the man who approaches. Likewise,
to know that a supreme good exists is not to
recognize God in it, although God is that supreme
good" [4].
Doubtless, in this purely natural state of
existence, we should have surmised that a knowledge
and a love of another and higher kind, and out of
the reach of our powers, was in itself possible, --
we refer to a direct intuition of the Divinity, and
a corresponding love. But in any case, we should
have realized that it was beyond us, and we should
have known also the reason why.
At this point Catholic theology intervenes, and
states that this higher destiny and state, which
surpasses the powers of our rational nature, is
given us by grace [5]. God offers us
supernatural happiness as a free gift. The
"blessedness of abstraction" fades in "blessedness
of vision," just, as a shadow is absorbed in a ray
of light.
The end of man, then, according to scholastic
philosophy, is an intellectual one. To behold God,
whether in His works, or face to face, is more
essential for happiness than love itself, according
to Thomas Aquinas, for love is after all a
necessary consequence of such a vision. Surely no
philosophy could give to knowledge a higher or more
magnificent role than this.
It must not, however, be thought that the
Schoolmen exclude other good things, such as
physical well-being, from human happiness. Rather
these things are considered to contribute to
happiness as a whole, and since man has a body, his
body ought to share in happiness just as his soul,
always on condition that these complementary good
things remain in due subordination to the human
good par excellence.
In concluding this section, let us note that the
supreme end of man, consisting in the full
development of his powers of knowing and will, is
not beyond grasp. Happiness is not a mirage.
Scholastic Moral Philosophy is optimistic.
C. Voluntary acts and
Free acts
Human conduct consists of voluntary acts, for it
is the will that tends towards the good in general
as presented to us by our reason, or towards any
particular thing which exhibits the quality of
goodness. 'Particular thing' must here be taken in
a large sense, so as to include not merely external
objects which we may wish for (as a landowner may
wish to add a field to his property), but also any
activity (eating, drinking, games, study) performed
in obedience to the orders of the will. We have
already seen that when confronted with a good thing
which our minds regard as simply good and without
defect, we necessarily will it (VII, C). We cannot
possibly destroy this tendency in our nature. Our
will has an insatiable thirst for the good. Liberty
enters only in the choice of things which are
partially good, or which reflection
shows to be limited in goodness.
It is therefore the voluntary act, and more
especially the free act, which is endowed with
morality. A morally good or bad act is above all a
free act. Why is this?
D. Moral goodness of a
human act
A thing or act is good when it is
suitable for us in some way. To live a life of
pleasure, to think only of getting rich, appears as
good only to a sensual and grasping man. A thing or
act is morally good only if it is
in agreement with the true end of
man, and contributes directly or indirectly
to our real perfection (XII, B). From the moral
point of view, pleasure and wealth are neither good
nor evil. They only become so when the will, guided
by the reason, either does or does not employ them
in the service of the truly human good, by
allocating them their proper place in the scale of
values. Goodness and moral goodness are accordingly
not synonymous: the latter is only one species of
the former. Morality will differ with the end
assigned, since it consists in the relation between
act and end. The conception of morality will
accordingly be different in the hedonistic systems
which regard pleasure as the only end, and in the
intellectualist system of morality of the
Schoolmen.
Morality belongs to the sum total of human
volitions, but more especially to our free acts.
Although the profound and necessary tendency of man
towards the good in general is indeed endowed with
morality, since it is that which sets the human
will in motion, moral character belongs principally
to the act which is freely willed; for once the
fundamental tendency referred to translates itself
into an actual volition, it will then be concerned
with a concrete, limited good, which forms the
subject matter of free choice. Thus man has the
awful power of choosing his path. He can turn away
from that which constitutes his true well-being,
and attach himself instead to things which are
doubtless endowed with real goodness of a sort, but
are nevertheless destructive of his own true
interests.
Liberty takes on a moral aspect when it is
considered in conjunction with the end of human
conduct. In consequence, anything which increases
or diminishes liberty -- dullness of mental vision,
the duly ordered or disordered state of passions,
bodily health or disease, education and habits --
all will affect the morality of
actions.
E. Objective
distinction between moral good and
evil
The end of man follows from his nature. The
supreme human good is what it is because man has
consciousness, is rational, and is endowed with
free will. In the ultimate analysis, human nature,
like all other essences, is founded upon an
immutable relationship of similitude with God (V,
A). Since this is the case, the relation which
exists between a human act and man's end must also
follow from the nature of things.
Whether we like it or not, it is what it is.
Morality does not depend upon the caprice of men,
and not even God Himself could change it. Whether
we wish it or not, a prayer must draw us towards
God, and blasphemy must separate us from Him. And,
if life in society is an indispensable condition
for the attainment of our individual ends (XV, A),
to help our fellows must be morally good, and to
seek to destroy authority must be morally bad.
As for these acts which in themselves have no
relation to man's end, and which are accordingly
know as 'indifferent,' they will have a subordinate
importance, and the end for which we freely perform
them will give them a borrowed moral character as
it were, which will make them really good or evil.
The most banal of all our acts -- such as going for
a walk, or working in a laboratory -- will possess
its character of goodness or evil, because of the
repercussion which it must ultimately have upon our
lives or upon the lives of other members of human
society.
F. Moral richness of an
act
From this is follows that the more an act
conduces to the perfection of our nature, the
richer will be its morality. Besides the intrinsic
character of an act which makes it good or evil,
and of which we have just spoken (finis
operis), Thomas Aquinas calls attention to the
intention (finis operantis),
and the circumstances of this act, as
being two other elements, which
increase or diminish its moral goodness or evil.
Thus, to open a subscription for the relief of the
poor is a good act by its very nature, and no human
intention could alter this intrinsic goodness
(finis operis). But the vanity of him who
organized the charity lessens the moral value of
the undertaking. In the same way, this value
increases, if he must undergo sacrifices or
difficulties to attain his purpose. It may be
noticed that these same elements (intrinsic
character, intention, circumstances) affect not
only the morality, but also the degree of reality
of the act itself. Consequently they enrich or
impoverish the personality from which all our
activities originate.
Notes:
1. Dominus actuum ducens ad finem, Summa.
Theol., Ia IIae, q. 1, art. 1, 2. Ibid,
Ia IIae, q. 1, art. 4.
3. The supreme good of man is therefore
something which is suitable, bonum honestum,
i.e., something which harmonizes with a rational
nature. It cannot be something merely useful,
bonum utile, since this is by definition
subordinated to something else. Nor can it be that
which is merely pleasant, for pleasure is after all
a corollary following upon activity (VII, D).
4. Ibid., Ia, q. 2, art. 1.
5. Ibid., Ia IIae, q. 3, art. 8.
<
Previous Page
---- Next
Page >
|