Ethics 1 - The Nature of Philosophical Inquiry PDF

1 Handout # 1 (Ethics-1) THE NATURE OF PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY (A summary study/written lecture compiled by: Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu) (Note: To properly understand this written lecture, please read in advance, Donald Palmer’s article “Introduction: What...

1 Handout # 1 (Ethics-1) THE NATURE OF PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY (A summary study/written lecture compiled by: Prof. Henry Francis B. Espiritu) (Note: To properly understand this written lecture, please read in advance, Donald Palmer’s article “Introduction: What is Philosophy” this is the essay immediately inserted/placed before Chapter 1 of your xeroxed textbook, Does the Center Hold. Likewise, be sure to read the whole Chapter 1 of the said book [pp. 4-33]. Three copies of the aforesaid book are in the reserve section of the library.) Prelude This course in philosophy will make you wonder. For philosophy is about Questioning, Scrutinizing Wondering! Philosophizing is to wonder about Existence and Non-Existence— concerning what’s truth and what’s falsity, about right and wrong, about what’s knowledge and what’s mere belief, about love and indifference, life and death, about temporality and eternity… and about so many thousand myriad things. To reflect and philosophize is to explore and exhaust all possibilities of our human condition. It means asking difficult questions on life and living. It means freeing oneself from the shackles of dogmatism and unreflective thinking. Philosophizing demands a life of risking one’s belief to be able to discover Reality. To philosophize is to break free from the stifling conventions and enslaving conditionings Philosophizing is resisting unfounded presuppositions and simplistic suppositions Philosophy is freedom from our taken-for-granted life! Philosophy changes our staid, boring life to a life of significance and meaning… But if you feel satisfied with your life right now And feel that there is nothing in your life that needs to change and that you assume that you have all the ready answers, then this course will simply waste your time Philosophizing is only for those who dare to bravely risk their cherished views in the light of what is Real, of what is the True, of what is the Good! Beware of Philosophy— for it will change your taken-for-granted-life and bring you to a life of meaning and purpose Philosophy as a Transcendental and Critical Discipline In our contemporary time, when we hear so much about the great divide between the arts and sciences, it is worth remembering that philosophy is a subject that cannot be said to belong exclusively to either category. By its very nature, philosophy is a transcendental discipline transcending both science and  2 art. For this reason alone, philosophy today has a great significance as a cultural and a critical bridge between these two branches of human thought and activity. To study the history of philosophy does not mean studying dead issues or ideas that are no longer important. The philosophical systems of the past have far more than a purely historical importance. Each of them represents a certain view of Reality and a way of thinking about the world that is still possible and into which, any of us, at reflective moments might enter. It is for this reason that the history of philosophy is more than just a history, for to study the history of philosophy is to enter into ways of thinking that are now possible, however implausible such views may seem to us in some respects. Moreover, even if we pride ourselves in being up-to-date people with modern ideas, it is still worth returning to other ideas we think we have superseded, in order to properly appreciate the strength of the replacement. The history of philosophy as a distinct subject goes back in the Western world, at least 2600 years ago. Philosophy begins with a question. This is something that Anaxagoras tried to bring out when he said, “Philosophy begins in wonder. It begins with awe and marvel”. He did not mean by this that philosophy begins with astonishment, but rather that it begins as a sort of reflective questioning, of wondering whether things are really so. Somehow, the origins of philosophical thinking were closely connected with what we now regard today as scientific enquiry; although it must be borne in mind that the characteristic feature of philosophical questioning was and is that they cannot be decided in the way that scientific questions are. It is in this sense that we assert that philosophy transcends or goes beyond science. What scientists try to do is to find schemes of thought that tally with experience. They answer their scientific questions by consulting and observing experience and the external world around them. In other words, we can say that the grand presupposition of natural sciences is that life is perfectly predictable at all times, and that all phenomena have laws governing their movements and actions, and that empirical experiences and observation can answer all our scientific questions. However, it does not mean that every question that we ask is always an empirical question. If that was the case, then the only questions would be scientific questions and there would be no room for question of other kinds, and in particular, for philosophical questions. Suppose someone wanted to argue that there were no philosophical questions. Then we should have to say that the question to which this is the answer namely, “Are there any questions which cannot be decisively answered by consulting experience?” is itself a question of the kind asserted not to exist. It seems fairly safe to conclude that there are no knockdown arguments to prove that there are no philosophical questions. However, a good many people today believe that philosophical questioning is irrelevant. This is mainly due to the tremendous effect of scientism, positivism, and dogmatic empiricism in today’s world. Even if we admit that scientific questions are the dominant questions that we have in the world; still it does not show that the only interesting questions or the only important questions are the scientific ones; because asserting in this way, one only shows his scientistic framework; his conviction has become hardened into dogmatism and positivism. Early Philosophical Questions We have said that in its origin in ancient Greece, philosophy was closely connected with science. This is partly explained by the fact that both subjects are forms of questioning. In addition, one of the first things which men are curious about is their natural environment. Thus, one of the first philosophical questions was concerned with the problem of what the universe is ultimately made of. The various ancient Greek philosophers gave assorted answers as to the question “What is the universe ultimately made of?” What is interesting to note are not the answers that they gave; what is revolutionary in their struggle to answer the question was their total breakaway from the usual mythical and religious ways of answering questions. In answering the question, they did not rely on an authority or on an oracle. They relied on argued reasoning (logic) based on their reflective awareness of the world around them. The final answers they gave are not really the crucial aspect of our curiosity. What is of great importance and significance to us is that such questions were asked at all, and the reflective process which they undertake to answer the questions. For not all cultures or societies have produced men of sufficiently strong curiosity and intellectual rigor to raise such philosophical questionings. The Nature of Epistemological Questioning Epistemology means “doctrine of knowledge”. This branch of philosophy has for its subject matter, knowledge itself, what constitutes knowledge, the sources of knowledge, and its limitations. In epistemology, we are not trying to establish what is true in any one particular field of work. Rather we are trying to examine and portray, to formulate, and if necessary, to criticize what are accepted standards of truth and falsehood in its universal implications. Philosophers ask universalized questions on knowledge since the question: “Is there really certain knowledge” remains problematic because of the varying conventional sources of knowledge. Thus, epistemology has to qualify what types of knowledge are really certain and indubitable.  3 The Nature of Metaphysical Inquiry The term “metaphysics” literally means, after physics. As such metaphysics needs to go beyond physics, i.e., beyond the physical empirical realm towards the quest for Reality, i.e., what really constitutes the Real--Being (Existence) Itself. Physics may tell us what kind of existent something is, but that something exists, physics take for granted. Therefore, questions of Being or existence or Reality belong to the domain of metaphysics. Philosophy of Value: Ethics or Moral Philosophy The concern of a moral philosopher implies a certain detachment, a standing back from the practical disputes in order to analyze and assess the validity of the arguments used in the defense of different positions and the moral arguments being used. It is important to remember that the goal of a moral philosopher is not primarily to preach some particular moral dogma or to apply this dogma to a particular society. The primary purpose of an ethicist is not to press his dogmatic views, but rather to engage in the specifically philosophical task of classification, analysis, critique, and assessment of the validity of any general moral standpoint. In ordinary life, one can find plenty of people putting forward dogmatic moral formulations without a shred of evidence or argument. The philosopher’s interest in these formulations extends only to the questions being raised concerning what can be said for or against such views. A Key Controversy in Ethics: Freedom or Determinism Of course, we must take into account, when considering questions about how humans ought to live or what patterns of behavior are to be accorded the most value, the actual nature of man. For there is no point in saying that humans ought to live in this or that way unless we have some grounds supposing that they can. To tell a woman that she has a moral duty to fulfill a vow of running a kilometer in one minute would be pointless. Therefore one standard by which a moral code may be judged is that of asking whether the demands it makes are such that, human nature being what it is, they could be fulfilled. And an answer to this question will involve an understanding of what actions are open to humans, and of human powers and potentialities. Some thinkers have argued that all events in the natural world are governed by inexorable (i.e., unalterable) laws to the effect that if an event of a certain kind happens then, necessity, another event of a specified kind will follow. If we go on to treat man as a part of nature, then according to this view, it would appear that his actions are not the result of freedom, but are like any other event, predetermined. This is the view of determinism. Now, the reality of moral duty would seem to presuppose the reality of freedom between alternative courses of action. Yet determinism, if true, appears to rule out this question of free choice. Political and Social Philosophy The branches of philosophy referred to as political and social philosophy are concerned with the cluster of problems of a philosophical kind that center on the nature of man and society. At first sight, we might think that these problems could be discussed under the heading of ethics or moral philosophy. This is partly true. Obviously, the nature of any society is due in part to the code of morality which is widespread within that society. Also insofar as a large part of morality (some might say, the whole of morality) is concerned with relations between humans, then to consider societal ethics is simultaneously to consider the problems arising out of the fact that humans are related in society; and that they are political beings situated in societal framework. This can be clearly seen if we reflect that there are some actions carried out in the name of society which, if carried out by individuals for their own purposes would be ethically and legally condemned. Judges have the power to imprison offenders, but no private individual is allowed to treat others in this way nor would most people consider doing so. It is obvious that there are problems that can be raised about person in society which cannot be tackled as if we are solely discussing relations between persons. In any community, we find some structures of power and authority over its members established corporately under the name of that community. Concerning such structures we want to know why they are necessary; how far and over what area they should extend; what justification there is for according to them powers which we would not accord to individuals; and what limits if any, there should be to the exercising of these powers. Connected with these problems, there are other analytic problems about how we should define and describe “society”. Is this a kind of super-person, with the government as its brain, the civil service its nervous system, the economy its stomach, the law its doctor, etc. Does “society” have an independent existence in Reality? Or is “society” just a convenient way of referring to many individual persons related in different ways?  4 Some thinkers have suggested that it is the purpose of society to make possible the best kind of life that individuals can lead. Does this mean that society therefore has to lay down and enforce a pattern of living covering the major part of each individual’s life? Or does it mean that society and government should only be concerned with securing minimum conditions beyond which persons shall choose how to live for themselves? Likewise, socio-political philosophy delves into the question; “what is the human person’s ultimate nature, and how does human nature affect governance, as well as societal and political decisions?” Then, there are questions about the nature of political freedoms or liberties of an individual vis-à-vis the State. These are the types of questions tackled by Socio-Political Philosophy. The Nature of Philosophical Analysis One can never make the philosophy of another person wholly his very own—we can only approximate other philosopher’s view by thinking through for ourselves the other philosopher’s perspectives. This point clearly differentiates religion and philosophy. For religion is a body of traditional teaching, a way of looking at the world which is taught and handed through authority, dogma, and tradition. Religion’s authority goes beyond reason, which faith calls “revelation” or sacred oracle from God. In philosophy, there is no “sacred “viewpoint or privileged truths that will escape investigative scrutiny. All so-called dogmatic answers will be thoroughly questioned. We should take note of this point when we hear complaints that philosophy is a very complicated subject and full of questionings. Philosophy may be a complicated subject in many ways than one; but it is very intellectually beneficial since it teaches the human person to think for himself/herself and thus become clear of who he/she is for him/herself in relation to others and the world. It is in this thought that the British logician, Bertrand Russell had perfectly captured the essence of an authentic philosophical inquiry, when he said: “Philosophy is to be studied not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions since no definite answers can, as a rule be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind is also rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good”. Reference: B. E. Copping, et. al. Thought and Ideals: The Mind of Man. London: Grolier Society, 1968; pp. 92-97. Palmer, Donald. Does the Center Hold?: An Introduction to Western Philosophy. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co., 1996; pp. 17-35. Palmer, Donald. Visions of Human Nature. Mountain View CA: Mayfield Publishing Co., 2000. Prelude free verse poetry finds its inspiration from the lecture of the Rev. Fr. Michael Reynan La Guardia entitled “The Essence of Philosophizing” (on January 16, 2014, Department of Philosophy, Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City, Philippines.)