Re: Virtue Ethics, Deontological Ethics, and Biotechnology

On Mon, 15 May 2006 06:55:39 -0600 "Rich Blinne" <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
writes:
> On 5/12/06, D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > David,
> > I've studied ethics. I've taught ethics. I've checked the
> /Encyclopedia of
> > Philosophy/ and a couple dictionaries of philosophy. I've not
> found any
> > reference to virtue ethics. The standard pair among philosophers
> is
> > deontological ethics (duty centered) and teleological or
> axiological ethics
> > (value centered). There are also such irrational variants as
> emotive ethics,
> > which taught that the intensity of feeling is the sole determinant
> of the
> > ethical status of an action or attitude.
>
> Jonathan Edwards' Nature of True Virtue is I believe an example of
> such an approach. I beg to differ that it is irrational, though.
> According to Edwards true virtue is to depart from our natural
> inclinations to do what God desires because it is truly beautiful.
> That beauty was of a higher order than the beauty of the laws of
> nature. Edwards was attacking the notion at the time that true
> virtue
> consisted of disinterested benevolence. Much of this derives from
> his
> views of the beatific vision. So, it would be safe to say his was
> an
> eschatological ethic. Given the role of eschatological intrusion in
> 20th Century Reformed thought I would not be surprised if there was
> some parallels to Edwards here. Terry Gray might be of help here as
> he
> is the list expert on Vos et al.
>
>
There is a radical difference between theologically directed recognition
of virtue and valuation based on emotional intensity. The former is based
on reason and revelation, not on irrational emotion. Edwards was too
rational to press for feeling as a proper basis for anything, except
perhaps repentance. I'm not that familiar with his works, but an
opposition to disinterested benevolence fits the notion that the Golden
Rule is not an adequate foundation for morality. There has been a popular
attitude that following the Golden Rule was adequate for acting morally.
But it's no more than a pretty good rule of thumb.
Dave
Received on Mon May 15 17:49:20 2006