Grounding Moral Dimension: Logos, Sentiments & Freedom
Different Ways of Grounding Moral Dimension
The Foundation in Logos
Aristotle, in the fourth century BC, proposed that our morality stems from our capacity for logos. Logos has many meanings, including speech and reason. We could say that we are moral beings because we have an argumentative capacity demonstrated through language. Unlike other living beings, humans can express the difference between right and wrong, good and bad.
The Foundation in Sentiments
David Hume, in the 18th century, proposed that facts are neither good nor bad; they are simply facts. We evaluate the facts we perceive in our surroundings. This evaluation is based on the feeling of pleasure or displeasure that arises spontaneously within us as we perceive a fact.
The Foundation in Freedom
Immanuel Kant, a contemporary of Hume, believed that freedom is the main characteristic of the will of rational beings. He thought that without presupposing freedom of choice, it is not meaningful to talk about morality. The moral dimension of humans cannot be understood without freedom. An important consequence is that human beings have dignity, not a price; they cannot be exchanged because there is no equivalent to each human, who has absolute value.
The Act of Argumentation
For Karl-Otto Apel, the foundation of morality arises when we argue, that is, when we present truly sincere reasons to others. When we present these reasons that we have discovered, we are accepting a fundamental moral norm. This rule states that for our argument to have full meaning, we must recognize that others are also valid interlocutors. This means that others are capable of arguing under equal circumstances, and their reasons may be as valid and real as our own.
The Hedonistic Tradition: Pleasure as a Goal
This tradition rests on three points:
- All living beings seek pleasure and flee from pain.
- Happiness is to organize our lives so that we maximize pleasure.
- Calculating reason helps us determine how to obtain more pleasure.
Individual and Social Hedonism
Epicurean hedonism is individualistic. However, in modern times, hedonism becomes social and is known as utilitarianism. It believes that humans are endowed with social feelings like sympathy and empathy. The principle of morality is then the greatest happiness (the greatest pleasure) for the greatest number of living beings. This concept has very important social implications, especially regarding the notion of the welfare state.
The Calculating Reason
According to Epicurus, there are stable pleasures, which consist of the harmony produced by the absence of pain in the body, and positive pleasures or joy. The former seems superior.
Jeremy Bentham introduced the arithmetic of pleasure, arguing that all pleasures are equal in quality, differing only in quantity.
John Stuart Mill stated that pleasures differ in quality; there are higher and lower pleasures.
Happiness and Pleasure
Pleasure is obtaining sensory satisfaction, while happiness is self-realization in carrying out one’s own life projects, which sometimes may not produce sensory satisfactions.
Happiness and Well-being
The British philosopher Bertrand Russell spoke about:
- The hell of boredom or tedium: People resort to dangerous means (alcohol, violence, etc.) to avoid boredom out of desperation.
- Excess of competitiveness: A product of indecision, worries, and fears.
- Envy: An envious person does not benefit from what they have.
- Sense of guilt: Some people are constantly thinking that they have made mistakes.
- Persecution complex: Sometimes we feel that everyone is against us.
- Fear of what others will say: The pressure of social norms.
The hedonistic tradition emphasizes pleasure as a goal, but it’s important to consider the different types of pleasure and the potential downsides of solely pursuing pleasure without considering other aspects of well-being.