Philosophy †Conscience (90/90) Essay

Discuss critically the weigh that we should always follow our sense of right and wrong when ma baron estimable conclusionsIt has traditionally been proposed that the moral sense is an established physical structure of strength, essentially justifying the view that it should be followed. Many notable figures through come in history Aquinas, Butler, Plato, Freud have structurally placed it in a potent rle. Whether this is by elbow room of triple-way analogies, hierarchical standing or even religious eminence, the moral sense serves a theoretical, and indeed practical, function as the human and societal arbiter. But then, there is in addition a possible disparity between the states of unmarried and collective sense of right and wrong, contri neverthelessing to the difficulties in determining which conscience is more suited to enacting honourable decisions. This predicates an interesting wave-particle duality the conscience either does not maintain this degree of control or, conversely, the consciences increased complaisant standing grants it an even greater direct of authority. It crumb similarly be questi peerlessd whether or not the consciences proposed supremacy necessitates an mortals reliance on it, or even, whether it is needed at all.Ideas in connection with the conscience argon far-reaching. The notion of ethical decisions creation g all overned by the conscience implies that there is a headway rle the conscience must(prenominal) play in enacting them. But, as addressed higher up, there are solid suspenses over its reliability its bumpmingly potent position and even its existence. My argument follows an documental line, paying close attention to that factor in which man is of sole importance. The human creation is the entity the conscience must contribute alongside, and vice versa. There is a clear discrepancy between common definitions of consciousness, in turn emphasising the inconsistency of thought on the look.The Collins Dictionary, for example, defines consciousness as world conscious(predicate) of peerlesss surroundings1 in contrast with the Concise Oxford Dictionary which classifies it as being aware of and responding to ones surroundings2. Herein, at the outset, lies an lie with. Surroundings and conditions are clearly noted by two definitions, yet the human acknowledgement and response to them are not so. This irregularity is highly applicable when trying to determine the consciences rle in the single(a)s decision-making. The minds twist on the individual, the individuals place in society, and, indeed, individuals themselves, are key to this matter.*****************May matinee idol himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ 3Presented above is the Biblical proposition most considered to be supportive of the multilateral theory of the Godhead. Theologically, three has been a invariable Biblical presence, It should be noted at the outset that the Biblical authors use of the number three is abundantly demonstrate4 The Holy Trinity, Noahs three sons and Jobs three daughters being notable cases of this.Accordingly, the human being consists of three separate elements either body, soul and spirit, as is noted above, or, most applicable to the question of conscience i) appetites ii) affections, and iii) reason the latter having familiar associations with the conscience. But where does this come into the idea of avocation ones conscience? Simply put, it is the idea that the conscience is dominant in its essence that theologians, philosophers and psychologists throughout times past have placed it above appetites and affections. Noted examples of this are Aquinas Hierarchy of Being, Platos Allegory of the Chariot, Freuds idea of the id, ego and superego, and others all leading to one literally presented conclusion conscience is boss, and ergo, should be fo llowed.Thomistic philosophy places the conscience in a divine rank alongside the Bible, the Church and Mankind as a whole. It is divine and institutional law guided through human mechanisms by the Synderesis Rulethe innate principle in the moral consciousness of every somebody which directs the agent to good and restrains him from evil5.This can be seen to relate directly to the idea of a benevolent conscience making ethical decisions good being the ultimate goal. Butler takes a similar position man is born to virtue6 self love and benevolence being the individuals guide. But, one might ask whether the apparent requirement to do good is really an objective balance. Can one really make an ethical decision without knowing the evil? 7Aquinas asserted five primary commandments which the conscience formulates in an ethical judgement self preservation and preservation of the innocent, prolongation of the species, education of children, living in a society and worshipping God. Despit e the need for these to be followed, and, of course, definitive of how we make ethical decisions, it is the fifth that one finds enticing for this special study. Worshipping God, the church a state of authority or, indeed, perceived authority, guiding our actions.It conforms to the hierarchy of being (an apt link with the tripartite theory) and is a premise for Gods benign tyranny. God is the pure form of Reason, and is so at the top of the hierarchy, subordinated by homo affections and animals pure appetite. By this we can see that this hierarchical method is multi-levelled the human being comprises these attributes just as a collective hierarchy does. They are simply metaphors for the consciences divine authority on a bodily and societal level.This is further supported by Platos Allegory of the Chariot the charioteer representing Intellect/Reason/Conscience, the white horse signifying the aforesaid(prenominal) morals and affections, and the black horse symbolising appetite s. star might be too facetious in making this interpretation but the use of a horse somewhat indicates that human beings are majorly of beastly appetites, other than reason are we Gods beasts as it were? Plato himself judged thatmanis a tame or civilized animal nevertheless, he requires proper instruction and a fortunate nature, and then of all animals he becomes the most divine and most civilized but if he be insufficiently or ill-educated he is the most savage of earthly creatures.8Yet, he conversely gives the analogous horse human traitshe is a lover of honour and modesty and temperance, and the follower of true glory he needs no touch of the whip, but is guided by develop and admonition only.9Even more interesting is Platos use of a human being in Gods rle. This gives two ideas God is either being anthropomorphised (putting him in inferior standing) or, alternatively, human conscience is God-ly10 maybe God is our conscience. Maybe He is mankind. Newman supports the former i dea an echo implies a voice a voice, a speaker. That speaker I love and revere11, by the literal hearing of voices. The speaker is the indwelling voice the conscience and the repercussion of Gods direct message. Here, on the surface, we can clearly see, due to the divine cloud hanging over this matter (God is good), that the conscience should be followed when making ethical decisions.Yet, one might ask the fundamental question of whether the conscience is worthy of its place above appetites and affections. The empiricist, David Hume, makes his opinion on the matter quite clearreason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them12.He provides a clear argument against always following our conscience when making ethical decisions, in favour of our appetites. One might take the view that our bad-mannered nature, without the influence of our conscience and an interventionist (or determinant) society is more e quipped to make ethical decisions. Indeed, the Reformation encouraged the break-away from the Church of Rome and set the individual conscience, not ecclesiastic authority, at the centre of religious life. As will be addressed in further detail later, if our conscience is distorted by society the individual may not be in full control of his own ethical decisions. One could conversely argue, however, that, as Plato seemingly hinted at above, Hume degrades humanity to the level of animals that we have no power to reason and therefore cannot achieve God-liness or make ethical decisions at all.Plato supplemented the ideas purveyed by his Allegory of the Chariot through other work The Republic, which, for this set about, provides the basis for examination of the relationship between individual and societal conscience. As with Aquinas, it is a question of hierarchy. The workers appetite followers and the soldiers protectors of the state and morals are both subservient to the philoso pher-kings the embodiment of reason.Platos view was that of an elitist society with the core conscience in charge knowledge is power13 (Conscience is king14) or, as I might conversely argue, power is knowledge (King is conscience). One can draw parallels with Orwells dystopian novel cardinal Eighty-Four, which, for me, offers an even more appropriate portrayal of this idea the lowly proles comprising the vast majority of society governed by appetites the Outer caller controlled by state value and propaganda, morals, affections and the Inner Party and Big Brother, the core of the state the quintessence of the conscience, it is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party15.These two examples demonstrate the conscience of the individual being mirrored in society. It raises issues as to whether the conscience of the collective should be followed when making ethical decisions as unconnected to that of the limited individual only in the mind of the pa rty, which is collective and immortal16 drawing distinctly Marxist parallels, and, perhaps more relevantly, conforming to the Thomistic precept of living in a society. One can link this to the thoughts of Soloveychik that conscience cant be someones own. Conscience is both personal and universal17. The pluralism, we, established in the initial proposition is markedly addressed with these connections to societal conscience.One extremity that may arise from this elitist, authoritarian ideal, however, is the issue of mind-control (Big Brother Is Watching You). A conscientious hierarchical society controlling the psyche of the masses may fulfil the rle of the individual in a more oblique, inflated manner. Appetites, affection and reason being governed by class structure bringing about a socially coagulated conscience. One might apply this to F.H. Bradleys personification our function is as an organ in a social organism. Thus, if conscience is uniform among individuals, why might ethic al decisions not be carried out similarly? Baruch de Spinoza believed that Gods knowledge is distilled through humanityan idea is adequate and faultless insofar as it represents knowledgeof the eternal and infinite essence of God18.Giving further substance to the idea of an individuals morals (their ethical make-up) being reflected on a collective level. Hume, however, argues against this, nothing is more surprising than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few19, pondering the dominance of a reasoned minority the collectives core conscience in turn eradicating the starting point for this theory. An answer to the issue in the proposition, however, is still not possible at this point. One cannot yet determine whether the conscience should be followed when making ethical decisions because of the sheer amount of subjectivity over the ethics of elitism.Still, the plausibility of a societal conscience maintaining this degree of authority is questionable. Despite the s eemingly loose connections mentioned above, the conscience of the collective is undoubtedly dissimilar to that of the individual. The juxtaposed issues of freedom and counterpoint individual mentality are enough in themselves to maintain this viewpoint. Obviously, this makes us question whether making references to literal states of authority is actually worthwhile. The individual has a conscience which both conflicts and complements the state/collective consciousness.Linking to the above issue, are governments/collectives always an objective balance? Seemingly, there are corrupt governments history has shown there to be degeneracy in the Church and other elements of society that control the individuals mindset. Yet it is indubitably the case that the mind (and conscience) is always influenced by the society in which it operates. This presents a mind-blowing paradox. Society is not only dogged by a central conscience but the conscience of the individual is conversely determined b y society. This might then suggest that whatever the case, the sole function that drives societal conditions, indirectly assumes its authority over the individual. J.B Watson the Father of Behaviourism proposedgive me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and Ill guarantee to take any one at haphazard and train him to become any type of specialist I might select 20He places himself a core being with societal influence in an authoritative position over specified individuals. This can be compared with the Freudian idea that the superego develops throughout childhood by external influences. The human being is born with the id the basis for appetites, eros (sex) and thanatos (death) drives these drives could interestingly be seen in a belligerently potent rle, supporting the idea of appetital authority la Hume. Subsequently, the ego develops the presentable faade that we apply to the world our affections. Then the superego, our reaso n and conscience the irrefutable censor of the human mind. It develops throughout childhood. In tandem with the environmental development, or determinism, mentioned above, children are completely egoistic they feel their needs intensely and strive ruthlessly to satisfy them21.So by this then, we can see that the tripartite, three is a consistent literal basis for the presentation of the conscience. I would, however, question whether this is a valuable method by which to present its authority. There are evident differences between the theories presented by each of these figures Freud socio-psychological Aquinas religious Plato the soul. These differences mean something. For one, each has specific rles. Some may apply strictly to societal conscience (Platos Republic and Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four), others may apply merely to the individual (Freud and Platos Allegory of the Chariot). It is nonetheless interesting that the tripartite is consistent throughout different periods and cultures. Ultimately, it comes to the point where one must consult Freuds verdict to prove what these give us, analogies, it is true, decide nothing, but they can make one feel more at home22.How else, then, can the conscience be interpreted authoritatively and conclusive of how we make ethical decisions? Put simply, the conscience is an qui vive it is disturbing it forces the individual to put themselves in uncomfortable situations and concurrently feel the effects of these. Although there are religious sides to this, for example, the threat, he who acts against his conscience loses his soul23, the principal factor here is indeed criminality. Of course, guilt is the one thing that the layman will consider alongside the conscience. Conscience is guilt to many. The objective conscience whole kit and caboodle by putting the individual at a discomfort, Freud believing that guilt is the consequence of not obeying it.Dostoyevsky provides a fine example of this in his notorious work Cr ime and Punishment, where the protagonist, Rodion Raskolnikov, experiences continual mental anguish following his homicidal actions. The novel gives the idea of mental demons If he has a conscience he will cause for his mistake. That will be punishment as well as the prison.24 Rodions shame ultimately forces him to confess. He follows his guilty conscience to make an ethical decision. This issue is also given great attention in Shakespeares tragedy, Hamlet, in which the king, Claudius, comes to realise, in retrospect, the implications of his fratricide my stronger guilt defeats my strong intent25.He is, however, prone to continuing his murderous tendencies. Although this is a literary construction, one might suggest that Claudius reverts to his thanatos drive, the superego not taking precedence. Another interpretation is that he adheres to the opinion that you perform a sin twice and it will cease to be a crime26, providing a distinctly self-centred stance. Above all, however, th is notion of guilt leads us to question whether the consciences precedence actually does entail our reliance on it. If the conscience can be seen to be malicious one might assume it is not all good or a worthy mechanism by which to make ethical decisions. Should we always follow our conscience if it occasionally encourages us to impart malevolence towards others?Yet, admittedly, I have placed the conscience, somewhat clumsily, in a potent rle by inappropriately treating it as an inanimate transcendent object. The conscience is a misleading phrase it can not be addressed in literal hurt as the above-mentioned figures and I have done so. It is an ambiguous concept a culmination of ideas, not a figurehead or core being that people must obey. In doing this I have partially neglected the fundamental points initially outlined those of human response to the conscience, as well as the issue of ethical decisions. The point is that the human being is its conscience they work in tandem ye t the individual conscience is contingent on the social conscience and vice versa. It is an eternal cog of human reasoning, working jointly to maintain relations and prevent wrongdoing.There is a deterministic problem associated with this question if the conscience is a necessary mechanism then seemingly we cannot escape it always following our conscience places it in a more authoritative rle than a judicial one. Aquinas, for one, believed that following our conscience is always right despite it not necessarily entailing good is this really the kind of mindset we wish when making ethical decisions? If one is to take Humes view of appetital dominance, the human essence being the guidance of our nature, we can, to an extent, countermand this. One might argue that the conscience is just a constraint on our essential urges. A constraint on the collectives blossoming Sartre asserting that we must act out passion before we can feel it27.Even today in such a complex, interlaced world th ere is a question over whether our primitive essence would beget greater happiness. Not at all am I suggesting that humans should revert to being primal, nor that happiness should be the human races ultimate goal, but, in terms of making ethical decisions, must one rely on the conscience? Indeed, there is a risk that reliance on appetites would encourage societal and individual regression. Hence, a viable alternative must be suggested.For me, this comes in the form of Social Darwinism (survival of the fittest) that mankind evolves by means of competition, the very essence of instinct is that its followed independently of reason28. Darwin appeared to prioritise appetites using them as a means for societal progression. One might assert that this ideal comes closest to loosening the fetters of both individual conscience and societal restraint, whilst not jeopardising our future. In answering the question, the various examples presented in this essay of the conscience being dominant i n its essence suggest to me that in any case the conscience deters our decision-making. Indeed, if we feel by any means constrained we are unable to make pure, objective ethical decisions, ergo, we should not be subservient to the conscience when making them.1 Collins Dictionary & thesaurus Two books in one, 20042 Concise Oxford Dictionary Tenth Edition, 19993 1 Thessalonians 5234 Richard D. Patterson, The Third Day Motif, The Use Of deuce-ace In The Bible5 The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy6 Joseph Butler. Class notes.7 This is addressed further with the issue of guilt later on.8 Plato, The Republic9 Plato, Phaedrus10 This is intended to mean the essence of God, rather than merely god-like attributes.11 Popes Letter On Newman12 David Hume13 Sir Francis Bacon14 Joseph Butler15 Nineteen Eighty-Four, Part 2, Chapter 216 Nineteen Eighty-Four, Part 2, Chapter 217 Simon Soloveychik, Free Man18 Spinozas Ethics19 David Hume20 John B. Watson21 Sigmund Freud22 Sigmund Freud23 Fourth Lateran Council24 Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment, Chapter 1925 Hamlet, Act 3 Scene 3, l. 4026 Jewish commentary27 Jean-Paul Sartre28 Charles Darwin