Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay about conscience
Altruistic vs selfish
The importance of conscience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay about conscience
Joseph Butler believes that people possess the ability to reason and rationalize. 1For Butler, this is evidence for the existence of the conscience. In Joseph Butler’s Five Sermons, he argues that conscience is a reflection on the actions of oneself and others, according to moral principles. 2In his first sermon, Butler states that “we are plainly constituted such sort of creatures as to reflect upon our own nature. 3[and the] principle in man by which he approves or disapproves his heart, temper, and actions, is conscience” (29-30). Butler argues that conscience is God-given and that human nature indicates that “we were made for society and to do good to our fellow creature, as that we were intended to take care of our own life and health and private good” (26). Conscience, as Butler conceives it, should always be obeyed when making moral decisions because it intuitively guides one’s actions toward the good of society and the good of the individual.
Butler identifies two driving factors behind moral decision making: self-love (not to be confused with selfishness, which has particular ends) and benevolence. 4He claims that “there is a natural principle of benevolence in man, which is in some degree to society what self-love is to the individual” (26). 5Butler claims that it is evident that human beings have benevolent motivations, and he argues that these benevolent motivations can make us happy and be consistent with self-interest. However, “benevolence and self-love are different” (27). Self-love is our general interest in securing our own happiness, while benevolence is seeking the well-being of another. But “their mutual coinciding, so that we can scarce promote one without the other, is equally proof that we were made for bot...
... middle of paper ...
...y” (45), which is why Rosa Parks conscience proved to be correct, as were the consciences of all of those who followed her in the Bus Boycott. This suggests the conscience does not come from society, and (when guided by the real nature of people) is universal throughout cultures and times.
Joseph Butler illustrates that the conscience is the final moral decision-maker. In his Five Sermons, Butler explains that the conscience is given to us by God to act intuitively and that it acts as the ultimate authority in moral judgments. Conscience, as Butler describes, is useful in making moral decisions for those who follow their real nature and act benevolently and out of self-love, not selfishness.
Butler, Joseph. 7Five Sermons, Preached at the Rolls Chapel and A Dissertation upon the Nature of Virtue. Ed. Stephen L. Darwall. Indianapolis, IN: 6Hackett Pub., 1983. Print.
Winthrop, John. "from a Modell of Christian Charity." The Heath Anthology of American Literature. Ed. Paul Lauter. Canada: DC Heath and company, 1990. 226-238.
Adam Smith’s moral theory explains that there is an “impartial spectator” inside each of us that aids in determining what is morally and universally good, using our personal experiences and human commonalities. In order to judge our own actions, we judge and observe the actions of others, at the same time observing their judgments of us. Our impartial spectator efficiently allows us to take on two perceptions at once: one is our own, determined by self-interest, and the other is an imaginary observer. This paper will analyze the impartiality of the impartial spectator, by analyzing how humans are motivated by self-interest.
Overvold, Mark C. "Morality, Self-Interest, and Reasons for Being Moral." Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 44.4 (1984): 493-507. JSTOR. Web. 6 Mar. 2014.
To judge one’s moral worth for his or her actions is a very important task. In the play, Enemy of the People by Henrik Ibsen, the main character, Dr. Stockmann performs in what many would consider a good, but moral worth is not determined by someone making a 10 second analysis of the actions and determining it. In order to determine moral worth, one can use Immanuel Kant’s book, Grounding for a Metaphysics of Morals. Within this book, Kant describes how one’s actions can be determined for the purpose of moral worth. Kant goes into detail and uses the cognitive imperative and other ways to determine moral worth.
A distinct conscience is formed by the values and desires of one’s unique identity. However, common beliefs of societal standards can influence conscientious desires. In the novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee introduces a young girl named Scout, who learns about the difference between social conformity and human conscience. Through this, she notices the conflict it brings: choosing to conform or stand with your desire. Through Maycomb’s discriminatory principles, Atticus’ actions against common beliefs, and Scout’s comprehension of Boo, Lee reveals how society’s standards and conformity hinders personal desires for righteousness.
From top to bottom, John Stuart Mill put forth an incredible essay depicting the various unknown complexities of morality. He has a remarkable understanding and appreciation of utilitarianism and throughout the essay the audience can grasp a clearer understanding of morality. Morality, itself, may never be totally defined, but despite the struggle and lack of definition it still has meaning. Moral instinct comes differently to everyone making it incredibly difficult to discover a basis of morality. Society may never effectively establish the basis, but Mill’s essay provides people with a good idea.
Many people have different views on the moral subject of good and evil or human nature. It is the contention of this paper that humans are born neutral, and if we are raised to be good, we will mature into good human beings. Once the element of evil is introduced into our minds, through socialization and the media, we then have the potential to do bad things. As a person grows up, they are ideally taught to be good and to do good things, but it is possible that the concept of evil can be presented to us. When this happens, we subconsciously choose whether or not to accept this evil. This where the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke become interesting as both men differed in the way they believed human nature to be. Hobbes and Locke both picture a different scene when they express human nature.
Is human nature inherently selfless or selfish? Although a seemingly simple concept, the aforementioned question has long been a profoundly controversial topic. While many claim that humans are intrinsically compassionate and inclined to help those in need, others argue that people instinctively prioritize their own individual security over other people’s welfares. Nathaniel Hawthorne’s literary works, “Young Goodman Brown” and The Scarlett Letter, as well as F. Scott Fitzgerald’s renowned novel, The Great Gatsby, all reference the idea that people impulsively pursue perfection, as determined by their community’s values. While different communities establish different standards for perfection, society as whole romanticizes the idea of perfection and subsequently people strive to create the illusion of a perfect life. How an individual represents the values idealized by a given community determines his/her reputation in that community. Although people may appear to wholesomely follow the values idolized by their community, in reality, human nature is inherently flawed, making it impossible for people to achieve perfection.
Hursthouse, R. (2003, July 18). Virtue Ethics. Stanford University. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/ethics-virtue
Every human being carries with them a moral code of some kind. For some people it is a way of life, and they consult with their code before making any moral decision. However, for many their personal moral code is either undefined or unclear. Perhaps these people have a code of their own that they abide to, yet fail to recognize that it exists. What I hope to uncover with this paper is my moral theory, and how I apply it in my everyday life. What one does and what one wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what one wants to do would usually bring immediate happiness, but it may not benefit one in the long run. On the other hand, doing what one should do may cause immediate unhappiness, even if it is good for oneself. The whole purpose of morality is to do the right thing just for the sake of it. On my first paper, I did not know what moral theories where; now that I know I can say that these moral theories go in accordance with my moral code. These theories are utilitarianism, natural law theory, and kantianism.
In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that human beings inherently have capability to make purely rational decisions that are not based on inclinations and such rational decisions prevent people from interfering with freedom of another. Kant’s view of inherent ability to reason brings different perspective to ways which human beings can pursue morality thus it requires a close analytical examination.
As human beings who interact in a society with other humans, we care a great deal about what others think about us. These judgements of others on someone are made from how you speak to them, your body language towards them, and especially your actions. As people want to uphold a good reputation, they will want to act good and moral. Additionally many religions emphasize what happens to your spirit in the after life. They preach that where you go in your after life is decided by the good and bad you do in your time on earth. This enforces many to act morally as they want to be happy in their after life. Also we all have a moral conscience that we use every single day to make decisions. Kant eluded that we feel “compelled to pass moral judgements on ourselves” (Wren, 1991, p. 22). Nobody truly wants to believe that they aren’t a good person. Therefore in order to pass positive moral judgment on one’s self, they act good and conform to society’s ideals and in turn are a valuable member of their
Scheick, William J. "Virtue and Identity: Last Works: Of Beauty and Virtue." The Writings of Jonathan Edwards: Theme, Motif, and Style. College Station: Texas A&M UP, 1975. 128-32. Print.
Whether put simply or scrutinized, morality cannot be defined simply by looking at it from one or two perspectives. One must acknowledge the fact that there are several different factors that affect judgment between “right” and “wrong”. Only after taking into account everything that could possibly change the definition of righteousness can one begin to define morality. Harriet Baber, a professor at San Diego State University, defines morality as “the system through which we determine right and wrong conduct”. Baber refers to morality as a process or method when she calls it a “system”. In saying “we” she then means to say that this concept does not only apply to her but also to everyone else. Through morality, according to her, one can look at an action, idea, or situation and determine its righteousness and its consequences.
Class notes. Man’s Desperate Need of Righteousness and God’s Glorious Provision of Righteousness. Faith Christian University. Orlando, Florida. August 2011.