Understanding Morality, Values, and Political Philosophy
Morality and Structure
All individuals possess a moral structure, making choices among options and justifying them based on a moral code, thus accepting responsibility for their selections. Morality, as a human attribute, involves choosing content in accordance with a set of values that shape behavior and influence our way of life. Given the diversity of lifestyles, there exist multiple moral frameworks. These moralities are often distinguished by factors such as race, religion, and ideals. Furthermore, each person should consider the circumstances imposed upon them, which are not of their choosing, including biological and psychological factors. According to Ortega y Gasset, these circumstances are a collection of elements imposed on the individual, forming part of their identity.
Conscience and Responsibility
Conscience develops practical judgments, applying universal moral standards to specific situations, with careful consideration of the circumstances. For instance, while the principle of not stealing is a general norm, conscience evaluates whether it is morally justifiable in a particular case. Self-criticism involves judging one’s own actions, either accepting or rejecting them, leading to feelings of guilt or satisfaction. Individuals are responsible for their actions performed freely, both internally, as individuals are self-constructed and accountable for their disposition, and externally, as they must answer for the effects of their actions on society.
Values and Moral Standards
Values and moral standards represent the relationship between human actions and a moral code. An action is considered just if it aligns with the standard and unjust if it does not. These standards:
- Apply exclusively to people.
- Significantly impact the individual.
- Are imposed as necessary requirements, urging all to strive for fairness and sincerity.
Political Science vs. Political Philosophy
Political science aims to describe, explain, and predict political phenomena. In contrast, political philosophy seeks to provide reasons for how a state should ideally be, rather than merely studying political phenomena as they currently exist.
Consensus Theory (Ethics of Minimums)
Consensus theory, or the ethics of minimums, strives to achieve a minimal universal moral agreement that benefits everyone through rational dialogue. This dialogue must address various rational arguments to determine what is right. Only values and norms agreed upon by all participants in the dialogue can be considered valid. These minimums are characterized by respect for the dignity of individuals. Such a dialogue can only occur and reach agreement within a reasonably rational and free society.
Objectivism vs. Subjectivism
Objectivism: Values exist independently of individuals and societies. A moral order is necessary to guide human behavior. People, through reason, can and should discover these values and transform them into moral goals. This perspective was advocated by Plato and Max Scheler.
Subjectivism: Objective or universal values that can serve as the foundation for moral norms do not exist. Values are human creations, contingent on individual appreciation of what is right or wrong. Taken to its extreme, this position leads to radical subjectivism, where everything is based on personal opinion, as championed by Nietzsche and Sartre.
Moral Absolutism vs. Moral Relativism
Moral Absolutism: This stance is related to objectivism. The validity of values (e.g., equality, honesty) is inherent and absolute, independent of individual recognition. These values are not limited by space or time. However, moral absolutism can lead to dogmatism.
Moral Relativism: This stance is related to subjectivism. Ratings are relative, depending on the individual and their circumstances. Objective values do not exist, and circumstances influence how standards are assessed. This position can lead to extreme relativism.
Philosophical Perspectives on the State of Nature
J. Locke (Liberal): In the state of nature, all are free and equal, possessing natural rights (e.g., right to life, property). However, this freedom leads to conflict, necessitating a marital state to resolve disputes and ensure the exercise of individual natural rights.
J.J. Rousseau: In the state of nature, the “noble savage” enjoys total freedom, where everything belongs to everyone. Private property creates problems. The marital state is a setback from Rousseau’s natural state, which democracy attempts to rectify by restoring freedom and equality.
Hobbes: Homo homini lupus est (man is wolf to man). Humans struggle for what others possess, but they are also rational. This rationality suggests forming an organized state, best achieved by placing one person in charge (absolutism).