Ethics Response Paper
Chapter Twelve
In the twelfth chapter of The Elements of Moral Philosophy, James and Stuart Rachels talk about the questions philosophers ask about character, then he discusses the virtues and Virtue Ethics. Instead of the ancient (Aristotle) asking What traits of character make someone a good person?, modern moral philosophers asked What is the right thing to do? This led modern moral philosophers to develop theories of rightness and obligations. In her article, “Modern Moral Philosophy,” Elizabeth Anscombe views modern moral philosophy as misguided since it rests on the notion of a “law without a lawgiver” (160). Anscombe’s response demands that modern thinkers should return to Aristotle’s approach to ethics; the virtues once again occupied the center stage.
In …show more content…
Rachels references Anscombe’s article where she views modern moral philosophy as misguided: the notion of a “law without a lawgiver” (160) I support Anscombe’s idea that the concepts of obligations, duty, and rightness are inseparable. To illustrate, before laws are made by the authorities, they are properly thought of before being enacted. The people are then obliged to follow these laws as commanded by the authorities. Failure to keep laws results in punishment. Thus, when discussing ethics we cannot leave out the lawgivers and focus only on the laws. Lastly, Rachels references Geach, where he narrates the story of Athanasius, who “was rowing on a river when the persecutors came rowing in the opposite direction: “Where is the traitor Athanasius?” “Not far away,” the Saint gaily replied, and rowed past them unsuspected” (164). Even though Geach thinks Athanasius is dishonest for lying to save himself from his persecutors, the majority if not all would respond to their persecutors in a similar manner, especially in life threatening situations as this. A Kantian would support Geach’s position on this
Chapter Twelve
In the twelfth chapter of The Elements of Moral Philosophy, James and Stuart Rachels talk about the questions philosophers ask about character, then he discusses the virtues and Virtue Ethics. Instead of the ancient (Aristotle) asking What traits of character make someone a good person?, modern moral philosophers asked What is the right thing to do? This led modern moral philosophers to develop theories of rightness and obligations. In her article, “Modern Moral Philosophy,” Elizabeth Anscombe views modern moral philosophy as misguided since it rests on the notion of a “law without a lawgiver” (160). Anscombe’s response demands that modern thinkers should return to Aristotle’s approach to ethics; the virtues once again occupied the center stage.
In …show more content…
Rachels references Anscombe’s article where she views modern moral philosophy as misguided: the notion of a “law without a lawgiver” (160) I support Anscombe’s idea that the concepts of obligations, duty, and rightness are inseparable. To illustrate, before laws are made by the authorities, they are properly thought of before being enacted. The people are then obliged to follow these laws as commanded by the authorities. Failure to keep laws results in punishment. Thus, when discussing ethics we cannot leave out the lawgivers and focus only on the laws. Lastly, Rachels references Geach, where he narrates the story of Athanasius, who “was rowing on a river when the persecutors came rowing in the opposite direction: “Where is the traitor Athanasius?” “Not far away,” the Saint gaily replied, and rowed past them unsuspected” (164). Even though Geach thinks Athanasius is dishonest for lying to save himself from his persecutors, the majority if not all would respond to their persecutors in a similar manner, especially in life threatening situations as this. A Kantian would support Geach’s position on this