Beyond the New Morality

Russell Shaw, Germain Grisez

Description

First published in 1974, with a second, revised edition in 1980, Beyond the New Morality has been used widely in introductory ethics courses at the undergraduate level. The book appeals to those who want something not overburdened with theory, and presented in a contemporary idiom. In this third edition of the now standard classroom text, Grisez and Shaw retain the best elements of the earlier versions, including their clear, straightforward presentation and use of nontechnical language. Although the basic approach, content, and organization remain substantially the same, the new edition does develop and amend some aspects of the theory. For example, the community dimension of morality is brought out more clearly and the first principle of morality is now formulated more accurately in terms of willing in line with integral human fulfillment.

Sujets

• Philosophie
• Philosophie de la religion
• Religion
• Christianisme
• Christian Theology
• Religious
• PHILOSOPHY
• Philosophie et théologie
• Ethics

Informations

• Publié par: University of Notre Dame Press
• Date de parution: 30 septembre 1988
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780268075552
• Langue: English

Extrait

Beyond the New Morality
The Responsibilities of Freedom
THIRD EDITION
GERMAIN GRISEZ and RUSSELL SHAW
University of Notre Dame Press
Notre Dame, Indiana
Copyright © 1974, 1980, 1988 by University of Notre Dame Press
Notre Dame, Indiana 46556
All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Grisez, Germain Gabriel, 1929– Beyond the new morality. Bibliography : p. Includes index. 1. Ethics. I. Shaw, Russell B. II. Title. BJ1025.G78′.3 88–4805 -->
E-ISBN 978-0-268-07555-2 ISBN 0–268–00678–4 ISBN 0–268–00679–2 (pbk.) Manufactured in the United States of America -->
This e-Book was converted from the original source file by a third-party vendor. Readers who notice any formatting, textual, or readability issues are encouraged to contact the publisher at [e-mail]
The authors affectionately dedicate this work to their wives:
J EANNETTE G RISEZ
and
C ARMEN S HAW
Contents
I NTRODUCTION
A. The Roots of the Ethical Problem
B. Why Ethics Is Important
C. The Nature of This Book
D. The Plan of the Book
E. Story of the Book
1. F REEDOM M EANS R ESPONSIBILITY
A. Freedom Is Physical Freedom
B. Freedom Is Doing As One Pleases
C. Ideal Freedom, Creative Freedom, and Political Freedom
D. Freedom Is Self-Determination
E. Determinism
Questions for Review and Discussion
2. B EING A P ERSON I S A L IFELONG J OB
A. Remaining a Person Is Not the Problem
B. Becoming a Person Is Not the Problem
C. The Problem Is How to Be a Person
D. Self-Determination
E. Character and “Fundamental Option”
F. Giving Meaning to Life
Questions for Review and Discussion
3. W HAT F ULFILLMENT I SN’T
A. The Problem with Pleasure
B. Fulfillment Isn’t Looking Ahead
C. A Goal to Be Achieved after Death?
Questions for Review and Discussion
4. F ULFILLMENT I S B EING A C OMPLETE P ERSON
A. A Whole Life
B. The Question of Commitment
C. How Self-Determination Works
Questions for Review and Discussion
5. P ERSONS C OMPLETE O NE A NOTHER
A. Others As Objects
B. Others As Community
C. Individual, Society, and Societies
D. Community and Human Purposes
Questions for Review and Discussion
6. W E D ON’T A LWAYS K NOW W HAT I S G OOD FOR U S
A. Cultural Relativism
B. Individualistic Subjectivism
Questions for Review and Discussion
7. H UMAN G OODS: R EASONS FOR C HOICES
A. Purposes
B. Eight Categories of Basic Human Goods
C. Human Goods: Aspects of Our Personhood
Questions for Review and Discussion
8. “O UGHT ” P OINTS TOWARD F ULLNESS OF B EING
A. Good and Ought, Bad and Ought Not
B. Being and Being More
C. What about Morality?
Questions for Review and Discussion
9. T HE F IRST P RINCIPLE OF M ORALITY
A. A Matter of Choice
B. Two Ways of Choosing
C. The First Principle of Morality
D. The Meaning of Immorality
Questions for Review and Discussion
10. T HE E THICS OF L OVE
A. Relatives and Absolutes
B. Utilitarianism
C. Love Is/Isn’t Everything
Questions for Review and Discussion
11. G UIDELINES FOR L OVE
A. The Golden Rule
B. Patience and Readiness to Forgive
C. Sharing and Cooperation
D. Readiness to Act
E. Fortitude
F. Self-control
G. Reality vs. Illusion
H. In General . . .
Questions for Review and Discussion
12. P ERSONS, M EANS, AND E NDS
A. Respecting Human Goods
B. Are There Inalienable Rights?
C. Ethical Absolutes and Consequentialist Solutions
Questions for Review and Discussion
13. W HEN A CTION I S A MBIGUOUS
A. Not Either/Or but Both/And
B. Two Kinds of Ambiguity
C. Killing the Unborn
D. Other Examples
E. War
Questions for Review and Discussion
14. D UTIES : R ESPONSIBILITIES IN C OMMUNITY
A. Contractual Duty
B. Communities and Duties
C. Authority
D. In Search of Community
E. The Moral Limits of Duties
F. When Duties Conflict
Questions for Review and Discussion
15. O UR D EVELOPMENT A S P ERSONS D EPENDS ON U S
A. Freedom’s Power and Limits
B. Moral Ideals
C. Overcoming Obstacles to Freedom
Questions for Review and Discussion
16. S HAPING THE F UTURE
A. What Education Cannot Do
B. What Education Can Do
C. Rules for Children
D. Religious Training
Questions for Review and Discussion
17. P ROGRESS IN P ERSPECTIVE
A. Is Progress Possible?
B. Progress vs. Freedom
C. The Search for Panaceas
Questions for Review and Discussion
18. R EVOLUTION AND R EFORM
A. Realistic Limits
B. Social Relationships
C. Reform of Community
Questions for Review and Discussion
19. T HE R OLE OF R ELIGION
A. Religion: Evasion of Responsibility?
B. Religion and Freedom
C. Religion and Evil
D. Religion and Hope
Questions for Review and Discussion
20. W E M UST D ECIDE W HO W E S HALL B E
A. Religion and the Religious Quest
B. Making Commitments to Organize One’s Life
C. Making Commitments: Right Ways and Wrong
D. Character and Virtue
E. Finally . . .
Questions for Review and Discussion
S UGGESTIONS FOR F URTHER R EADING AND R ESEARCH Index -->
Introduction
We are proposing an ethics. But what is ethics ? As we use the word, it means a philosophical study of morality, of the foundations on which morality is based, and of the practical implications of a systematic moral outlook.
We believe ethics must start by clarifying the fundamental notions of freedom, action, and community. Then it can go on to examine the question “What is the ultimate distinction between moral good and moral evil, between action which is right and action which is wrong?” An answer becomes useful in practice, however, only after one has worked out a satisfactory way of thinking through concrete moral issues—“Should I do this or that?” Thus we next turn to the problem of establishing basic moral principles. Finally, once one is in a position to take a reasoned view of moral issues, it is possible to ask and try to answer the question “To what extent can I close the gap, in my life and in society, between the way I think things ought to be and the way they are?”
History studies human actions, but it looks at particular actions which have actually taken place; ethics is concerned with human action in general or with possible kinds of actions. Psychology and the social sciences also have somewhat the same subject matter as ethics, but they are mainly concerned with how human beings actually do act and societies actually do work; ethics concentrates on how persons ought to act and societies ought to be formed and reformed.
Theological ethics (moral theology or Christian ethics) deals with many of the same questions which are treated here philosophically. The principal difference is that theological ethics takes for granted, as a point of departure, the doctrines of a religious faith, while a philosophical approach does not take for granted any particular set of beliefs. Although it is impossible to question everything at once, the philosophical approach regards every belief and viewpoint as in principle subject to questioning.
In trying to answer the questions which it asks, philosophy points to facts which anyone can observe and proposes arguments which any reasonable person should accept. “Arguments” here does not mean contentious disagreements, however. Ethics argues mainly in the sense that it proposes clarifications of the meaning of certain basic notions, such as “doing an act” and “morally good,” and then draws out their implications.
A. The Roots of the Ethical Problem
The central problems of ethics readily present themselves to a philosopher today in a historical context. Although it would take us too far afield to go into that context in detail, it is necessary at least to indicate the deep historical roots of the ethical problems with which people today continue to grapple.
These roots are twofold. On the one side is the Judeo-Christian religious tradition; on the other, the Greco-Roman humanistic tradition.
The belief that God is the creator of all things is part of the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. The act of creation is pictured neither as an accident, nor as something God had to do, nor as an effort on his part to fulfill some sort of need, but as a completely free act. Also part of this religious tradition is the belief that human beings are made in God’s image and somehow possess a freedom resembling the freedom by which God creates.
The Judeo-Christian tradition is based on the belief that God freely reveals himself to humankind and, in doing so, extends to human beings the offer of a special, personal relationship, an offer to which they in turn freely respond. Jews believe they are free to accept or reject the Covenant proposed through Moses; Christians believe they are free to accept or reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Of course, both Jew and Christian also believe they ought to accept the Covenant or the Gospel.
The ethical significance of this lies in the fact that according to the Judeo-Christian tradition human beings have freedom of self-determination. They can make or break their whole existence by their own acts, their own free choices, just as God was able to create—and could as well not have created—by his own free choice.
When, however, the Bible deals with moral good and moral evil, with what is right and what is wrong, it undertakes no general explanation of these concepts. The Covenant and the Gospel contain specific commands, which are represented as God’s will; and the Bible always assumes that acting in accord with divine commands will be in the best interests of human beings. But it makes no extended attempt to explain why this should be so, beyond emphasizing that the well-being of human persons depends upon their friendship with God, their creator.
The Greek philosophical tradition worked out various conceptions of what a human being is. Each of these conceptions of human nature served as the basis for an ideal of human life. Having developed ideas about what a human being should