Ethics Lecture Six

Ethics – Lecture Six 16/11/05


Both Confuciusian (and other Asian ethical theories) and, in Western philosophy, Aristotelian ethics could be said to be concerned with formations of the self (subject).

Or: we could say the development of the self.

Explain: formation of self or development of self.

Who we are is closely connected to what we choose – in fact some people some people might go as far to say that who you are IS the choices that you make.

Lets begin with the look at the simple development of a person – who they are – and then look as some philosophical views the development of self.

These are some developmental terms to do with the formation of self.

(quote one)

Temperament

Personality

Character

Even when a baby is very small we might say that the baby has it own way of responding to certain events – loud sounds make it cry – it likes to watch TV, etc. – this we might call temperament.

Later when that child grows ups and into their teenage years - they begin to act and think in certain ways – these patterns of acting and thinking are what we call personality.

These patterns of acting and thinking can change – and we will discuss what may make someone change their personality later in the lecture.

Character - is a person’s reliable pattern of making ethical choices – so if someone has no reliable pattern we can say that they have no character – if the person has a faulty or a pattern that doesn’t work well – we could say that they are of bad character – if a good or well working pattern of good character.

So it is possible that someone might have developed a good personality – outgoing, relaxed, charming – and yet may not have developed a reliable pattern of ethical choices – in other words, chararacter.

Character – like personality – can change.

If there are ethical issues to do with the formation of the self baby – they are seen as the responsibility of the parents or teachers and not of the baby.

We think that babies and very young people are not able to make decisions about their development – or formation – of self.

This all a description of the formation of self – the next question we need to ask is: Is the formation of self ever finished?

The answer to this question I would say is ‘no’.

Let’s look at this in more detail and lets see how this formation of self relates to certain Asian philosophies – such as Confucianism and Buddhism – and how they form their ethics.

But first we need to understand this term:

(quote 2)
Second nature
A habit or mode of behavior so long practiced that it seems innate, as in Driving in heavy traffic is second nature to Chris. It alludes to the fact that very frequently repeating something makes it seem completely natural or inborn.
So that a person might have a developed a personality based advice and expectations that they get from parents and teachers plus some of their own ideas of what they should and shouldn’t do.
But sometimes this development is not so smooth – there might be a very developed personality – but a not so developed character – which become developed by a reflective examination usually of how the world actually is – and this is followed by a change in the direction is which one wants to develop their character.
This change of direction is the development of second nature – repeatedly making choices and taking actions so often that they seem as if you were born with that ‘nature’ – habitually.
(quote 3)
This phase of reflective examination in the development (or formation) of self that leads to a second nature is central to most classical Asian philosophy.
Upanishads
Bhagavad-Gita
Most Early Buddhist Texts
Analects of Confucius
A Western philosopher for who second nature is central is Aristotle.
While many Asian philosophies and ethical theories share this concern with Aristotle with the development of a second nature – what the second nature should be and how to get there is very different for each of them.
One thing is the same: all of them think that our ordinary human nature (what we might call our first nature) – the one that we begin with as babies and which develops as we get older – of desires and pleasure seeking – should be replaced with a second nature.
Some classical Hindu philosophy and in early Buddhist philosophy to reject this first nature quite strongly (all of it has to go) while in Aristotle and Confucius – there is not such a strong rejection of first nature – though both Aristotle and Confucius think that we can improve our natures.
For Aristotle – the foundation of goodness is good habits – but to develop these good habits a person needs a reflective phase – an insight phase - where they understand which habits are good.
(quote 4)
The ‘formation of self’ and the acquiring of a ‘second nature’ are very important in the ethical systems found in Asian philosophies - and in Aristotle.
What should be our second nature?
How do we work towards it?
What benefit does it have for our lives?
These questions are not entirely absent from Western philosophy – but they do not get the same strong focus as in Asian philosophy.
If we can change our character – how do these changes take place? It is interesting to note that there is quite a lot of agreement between psychologists and philosophers – both East and West – that acts of will (to want to be a different person) DO NOT play the biggest part in change – what is more important to a person who want to change their character is situation
In other words, the places and routines that a person puts themselves in.
So- according to this theory - some of the most important decisions that a person makes (in the formation of character) are where to go to university, who to marry, what sort of job to do, etc. – and NOT there efforts to try and change themselves.
Each of the decisions of where we PLACE/PUT ourselves leads us to form a life that helps to from character and personality.

David Hume (1711-1776) – the Enlightenment philosopher says in his essay “The Sceptic” – that the way to change yourself is to change you routines and pursuits – and then you will find that you will experience a gradual – not immediate – change in yourself.
This new pattern of living causes changes in personality and character.
In many Asian philosophies the development of a good second nature leads to reliability, trustworthiness, and compassion (meta).
In the Hindu tradition this development of a good second nature can lead to an experience of Brahman – the One reality – an experience of absolute value.
A central idea in the Hindu and Buddhist tradition is that the development of a good second nature is precursor (comes before) an experience of the complete loss of self.
This experience of the complete loss of self (or perhaps, we could say an understanding that there was never any self there to begin with) is said to be in those traditions the end of suffering – or complete fulfillment – or complete happiness and freedom.
In the Daoist and Confucian philosophies (Aristotelian) the need for the development of a good second nature to lead to complete loss of self is emphasized – but they do believe that the development of a good second nature will lead to having a better experience of life – for yourself and others.
In Western ethics we seen: Act and Rule Consequences and Nonconsequentialism – Absolutism and Relativism – Free Will and Determinism,
(quote 5)
‘Asian’ Ethical Philosophy
The development of a Self (through the development of a good second nature) which leads to a life of value.
(quote 6)
Some reasons why the ‘Asian’ ethical model (or a model which takes seriously the connection between what people do and their developed selves) may be better than the ‘Western’ ethical model:
(1) The person’s character limits what a person can or cannot do.
(2) The situations that people get themselves into – where they have to make ethical decisions – are often based on the kind of people they are (the kind of self that they have developed)
(3) To have developed a good second nature is to have a life in which harmony is primary – and conflicts with others are lessened.
The idea of harmony (or sometimes translated as naturalness) is central to Confucius philosophy.
Confucius (551-479 BCE)
It is Confucius to whom many philosophers point to as providing a better account of formation of the self than any Western philosopher (including Aristotle).
(quote 7)
The best way to understand the development of the self is within the context of family, community, tradition, and culture.
It is said that Confucius offers a better, fuller account of this than any other philosopher.Next week we will begin to look at Confucius.