Ethics has been an important discipline that has been discussed for ages without losing its importance or timeliness. With this importance, a problem regarding the source of ethics appears throughout the ages with different views and theories following accordingly. One of the various suggestions made regarding the source of ethics is the secular understanding of ethics. The modern period where knowledge is thought to be power is also the period where secular ethics came (...) into prominence. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to study secular ethics, a perception of ethics that interprets the source of ethics outside of the religion and within the earthly world and considers reason to be the ethical principle rule maker. The aforementioned way of thinking was put forward in accordance with the English philosopher Francis Bacon (d. 1626) who was referred to as the father of modern science owing to him uttering “Knowledge is power’’ slogan at his age. Although the philosopher is more widely known more for his properties as a scientist, he also shared his thoughts on ethics in his works titled The Essays and in The Advancement of Learning. Although the ideas suggesting that religion is not the source of all ethics were voiced prior to Bacon, he, as a clear reflection of the fundamental characteristic of English empiricism, went down in history as the first person who expressed the modern philosophy approach and enlightenment view replacing classical philosophy approach and teleological universe view in the English history of thought. Bacon stated clearly that experiments and experiences are essential for scientific knowledge and accordingly, emphasized that the mind could explain everything related to humanity and the universe. This emphasis laid the ground for a secular moral understanding which does not base religion as its source, thus making it secular. With that mentioned, it should be noted that the period that he was in had an important role in his acceptance of secularized ethics. The said time period is a period where the Industrial Revolution occurred and colonization policies rose with it. Accordingly, how the Industrial Revolution and the scientific developments that led to it had encircled Bacon could be understood from his motto. This encirclement could easily be seen in his leadership of settling in science as a power in our minds and how he reflects the scientific methods to the ethics. As much as the socio-cultural conditions that were created by the Industrial Revolution had an effect on the ideas of Bacon, the psychological effect that was created by his ‘’Knowledge is Power’’ understanding had an influence over colonial policies. The viewpoint “Knowledge is power’’, which prepared the Industrial Revolution and later on utilized it to increase its own importance and strength, brought mental transformation and changes in consciousness with it. Humanity now believed that they had authority over nature and had the power to rule over it. It developed an ethical viewpoint that it could utilize nature as it likes for its own benefit and comfort. The said consciousness has created differences in ethics and behaviors while causing the purposes of and ways to be ethical to change. Accordingly, having information has emerged as the most important ethical act and sentiment; reality and meaning have been started to be searched in the world where humans could feel and see. It could be said that the secularized ethical viewpoint Bacon laid the foundations of started here. In addition to controversial aspects of secular ethics that Bacon tried to lay the foundations of independent of religion, we could refer to a positive aspect such as this: In the present, religion has sometimes been suggested as the source of the evil deeds that were done by humans and even natural and ethical evils have been used to imply that there is a God that wants bad things for humanity. Secular ethics could be utilized to show how ungrounded these claims are. In other words, secular ethics could be utilized to point out that claims putting the responsibility of immoral attitudes and acts on religion and blaming religion for these acts have no concrete ground. Although his personality as an ethics philosopher has been secondary, the importance he has due to voicing an ethical understanding that is outside of religion, that is secular ethics, makes it clear that there is a need for more studies regarding him. This article was written due to this necessity and utilized secondary sources to present Bacon’s views on ethics. (shrink)

Uncovering the historical roots of naturalistic, secular contemporary ethics, in this volume Michael Gill shows how the British moralists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries completed a Copernican revolution in moral philosophy. They effected a shift from thinking of morality as independent of human nature to thinking of it as part of human nature itself. He also shows how the British Moralists - sometimes inadvertently, sometimes by design - disengaged ethical thinking, first from distinctly Christian ideas and then (...) from theistic commitments altogether. Examining in detail the arguments of Whichcote, Cudworth, Shaftesbury, and Hutcheson against Calvinist conceptions of original sin and egoistic conceptions of human motivation, Gill also demonstrates how Hume combined the ideas of earlier British moralists with his own insights to produce an account of morality and human nature that undermined some of his predecessors' most deeply held philosophical goals. (shrink)

The origins of professional ethical codes and oaths are explored. Their legitimacy and usefulness within the profession are questioned and an alternative ethical source is suggested. This source relies on a commonly shared, naturally knowable set of principles known as common morality.

Referring to Hannah Arendt’s book Eichmann in Jerusalem, the Southern US fiction writer Flannery O’Connor expressed the effect of the revelations about the horrors of Nazi Germany as ‘haunting’. Taking this comment and her admiration of Arendt as a cue, this article rereads Flannery O’Connor’s fictional depiction of secular characters. Usually lauded or critiqued for her entanglement in ‘otherworldly’ concerns, here these concerns become comprehensible as much as political intervention as motivated by ‘religious’ belief. O’Connor’s frequently humorous use of (...) her fiction as a retort to the secular world was inflected by her reading of Eric Voegelin’s contemporary secularization thesis with its criticism of all ‘isms’. In this context, O’Connor’s admiration for Arendt becomes all the more intriguing (since Arendt’s interpretations of the human condition clashed with Voegelin’s), and allows one to stage a theoretical meeting in order to explore O’Connor’s depiction of the secular in relation to a speculative exploration of how Arendt might have responded to the fiction of O’Connor. Such a staging is accomplished here via a reading of O’Connor’s short story ‘The Lame Shall Enter First’ read against Arendt’s concerns, principally those expressed in The Human Condition. (shrink)

My thesis is that Albert Camus offers key elements of a viable nonmetaphysical, post-secular ethical and political anthropology and explanation of evil. Idefend my thesis in two parts. First, I explicate and analyze Camus’s remarks on human nature and injustice primarily in his political essay The Rebel. Camus offers a nonmetaphysical picture of human nature, inspired by the Greeks, as that out of which rebellion to oppression springs but also as that which frustrates any final resolution to the problems (...) of history. Secondly, I offer a reading of The Fall. I argue that Camus’s depiction of human nature in this work, contrary to typical readings, highlights his appreciation of the insight and pragmatically desirable consequences of the Christian concept of sin. I show thatCamus depicts the possibility of a “healthy” guilt, a guilt linked to the pursuit of freedom and a responsibility to self and to others. (shrink)

Establishing acceptable norms of behavior and consistent standards of conduct has been part of the human enterprise since the dawn of time. Without principles of ethics and the moral rules that affect individual behavior, humankind would plunge into a state of chaotic indifference, insecurity, and unending fear. But while few question the need for moral guidance, a growing number of people believe that the only ethic worth considering must rest on a biblical foundation. Is morality dependent upon God and (...) "revealed truths" found in scripture? Must this claim be accepted without question lest we risk the torment of eternal damnation for questioning it? Without critical evaluation and careful scrutiny, there is little hope of distinguishing truth from unfounded belief. How valuable is the Bible as a source for ethical truth? Do the scriptures truly have the insight needed to guide humankind safely through the moral dilemmas of modern society? What constitutes a biblical ethic? Should the Bible be construed as the only basis for moral teaching? Is it really the final authority on moral issues, or are there secular alternatives that can serve as guides to acceptable conduct within the human community? A distinguished group of social philosophers, biblical scholars, and ethicists met at the University of Richmond, Virginia, under the aegis of the Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion and its Biblical Criticism Research Project, to address these and related questions. The essays in this provocative work demonstrate a diversity of perspective and breadth of insight that will shed much needed light on the nature of ethics. The contributors to this volume include: Robert S. Alley, Joe Edward Barnhart, Joseph L. Blau, Frank E. Eakin, Jr., Lewis S. Feuer, Joseph Fletcher, Theodor H. Gaster, James H. Hall, R. Joseph Hoffmann, Paul Kurtz, Gerald A. Larue, John Priest, Ellis Rivkin, Richard L. Rubenstein, and Richard Taylor. (shrink)

In this essay, I argue that Christian ethicists should not think of themselves as religious ethicists. I defend this claim by arguing that the concept of religious ethics, as it has come to be understood as a discipline that is distinct from secular ethics, is incoherent. In part one, I describe the fraught attempts by theologians in the 20th century to identify the distinctiveness of Christian ethics. In part two, I argue that certain accounts of natural (...) law unwittingly reinforce a problematic conception of secular ethics. Part three examines some trends in religious studies and comparative religious ethics to highlight problematic conceptions of religion. Drawing together these strands of inquiry, I contend that that the secular‐religious dichotomy in contemporary ethics should be rejected, but by the same token, I suggest that comparative ethics remains a worthwhile enterprise. (shrink)

One of the central tasks of meta-ethical inquiry is to accommodate the common-sense assumptions deeply embedded in our moral discourse. A comparison of the potential of secular and theistic ethics shows that, in the end, theists have a greater facility in achieving this accommodation task; it is easier to appreciate the action-guiding authority and binding nature of morality in a theistic rather than in a secular context. Theistic ethics has a further advantage in being able to (...) accommodate not only this essential conceptual feature of morality, but also the existence of moral requirements and their source of normativity. (shrink)

The study contains the interpretation of F. Nietzsche's concept “Übermensch” as a program of modern human’s orientation within conditions of secularization. The “Übermensch” is presented as a form and a mode of secularized ethics. Such interpretation gave the methodological instruments to describe the main features of contemporary ideological and world view tendencies and their changes character, including such processes in Ukraine.

This paper examines the role that religious belief plays in societies' treatment of nonhuman animals, first asking two questions. Does religious belief continue to play a role today in societies' treatment of nonhuman animals, and should it? The paper discusses the interaction of religion, secular ethics, and the law. As with a three-legged stool, each leg or component relies on the next for support. Religious values and claims, as features of the ethical framework by which many people live, (...) have daily implications for nonhuman animals. On a sliding scale, negative to positive, a religious point of view may affect other animals in different ways. Beliefs - religious in nature and origin - about other animals sometimes stand behind the claims and ethical formulations of avowedly nonreligious people and institutions and may be of some interest to philosophers and historians. The paper concludes that only through consideration and involvement of the three separate, yet inter-connected, components can animal abuse be effectively addressed. (shrink)

"In this fresh critique of Rawls’s political liberalism, Dostert offers a bold and stimulating account of the political potential of religion that actually enhances the prospects of a genuinely democratic public discourse. Drawing lessons from the civil rights movement to the Jubilee 2000 effort, _Beyond Political Liberalism_ presents a profoundly hopeful challenge to the ways of thinking about liberalism and religion that dominate both political science and religious studies today. Setting aside worn diatribes and tattered dichotomies, _Beyond Political Liberalism _constructs (...) a promising vision of religion's role in liberal society that will be of interest to anyone concerned about the future of contemporary western culture." —_Daniel M. Bell, Jr., Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary_ "This is a fine book. It is clearly written, accessible to a broad audience, and of special relevance now, both in academia and in the larger political and intellectual culture." —_Eldon Eisenach, University of Tulsa_ In _Beyond Political Liberalism,_ Troy Dostert offers a critical examination of political liberalism, the approach to liberal political theory advanced most forcefully in the later work of John Rawls. Political liberalism's defenders claim that an “overlapping consensus” of shared values holds out the strongest prospects for regulating democratic politics in light of our moral diversity. Dostert contends, however, that the attempt to establish such a consensus in fact works to restrict and control the presence of religious and other moral perspectives that can ennoble and invigorate public life. Dostert argues that there is a steep price to be paid for this conception of politics, for what results is a political vision characterized by a profound distrust and fear of citizens' comprehensive convictions—the animating source of many citizens' political activity. He suggests that a “post-secular” ethics is a more appropriate response to moral diversity than restricting and managing the presence of religion and other moral perspectives in public life. By drawing on the religious witness of the civil rights movement and the work of theologian John Howard Yoder, Dostert elucidates several core dialogic practices and illustrates their value through a consideration of the contemporary debates surrounding international debt relief and abortion. (shrink)

In this paper, I consider the fruitfulness of the notion of supererogation for an understanding of the relationship between religious and secular ethics. I approach this theme in three ways. First, I note a contrast between the virtues of neighbour love and infused temperance, as they are represented in the work of Thomas Aquinas: in the first case, but not the second, appeal to religious context changes the status of an action, so that it is now obligatory when (...) it would otherwise have been supererogatory. I consider how we might explain this difference, and what it indicates about the distinctive character of a ‘religious ethic’. Next, I note how John of the Cross's account of the spiritual life, while tracking Aquinas's discussion on certain points, invites a more radical revision of the distinction between obligation and supererogation. Finally, and briefly, I argue that these reflections throw new light on a puzzle that is posed by some attempts to ground religious commitments in moral commitments. In all of these ways, the notion of supererogation turns out to be key for an appreciation of the distinctive character of a religious vision of human life. (shrink)

Wright, Ken France's state school system has a long tradition of freedom from religion. It owes a great debt to Jules Ferry who was Minister for Public Instruction from 1879 to 1885, and to Ferdinand Buisson, his Director of Primary Education. A law of 28 March 1882 removed the teaching of religion from all primary schools, to be replaced by ethics and civics.

Ethics is a study which deals fundamentally with the rules of conduct from moral point of view. The main characteristic of ethics is to judge the value of moral act or moral conduct. Therefore, ethics means a code of conduct. The history of the development of morality grew through a long process of evolution of certain morality like ‘taboos’, habits and customs in the primitive society. There are two broad divisions of ethics i. e., secular (...) ethics and theological ethics. The history of the development of secular ethics flourished through four periods i. e., the Greek ethics, the Medieval ethics, the Modern ethics and the Contemporary ethics. Each period has its own prominent characteristics. Moreover, the history of theological ethics grew with the rise of different religions like Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. Morality has been developed during the period of more than two thousand years. Within this long span of time, many doctrines, ideas and values are included in it. Hence, morality takes different shapes in different periods and ethical views also develop accordingly. In this article, an attempt has been made to show a gradual development of morality- secular and theological. Again, the similarities and the dissimilarities between secular and theological ethics are the additional concerns of this paper. Philosophy and Progress, Vol#73-74; No#1-2; Jan-Dec 2023 P 59-94. (shrink)

The book relies on Bernard Lonergan’s method. It addresses today’s religious conflicts in the Middle East which have led to migrations of millions of persons. It systematically explores possible breakthroughs that might help people open their hearts to one another.

A challenging book examining issues such as biotechnology, AIDS and nuclear weapons and demonstrating that Christian ethics has something important and ...

Comparing and contrasting nonreligious and religious perspectives on ethics and morals has perhaps attracted the greatest attention of any secular study area. There are indeed negative preconceptions about seculars that express worries about how morality can be preserved without the influence of religion. The research begins with definitions and categories of morality, along with current views on how they came to be and how to evaluate them. Examined are secular attitudes and actions in areas including prosociality, violence, (...) criminal activity, drug usage, sexual orientation, helping, and altruism. Secular morality is showing a trend in many sectors towards prioritizing individuals above group affiliation. General morality among secular people favors moral consequentialism over deontology and reasoning over intuition. Religious ethics explain that society can only be improved if human beings have a pure soul. So, we can say that religious Ethics have a main focus on the improvement of spirituality and the soul of human beings for a peaceful society. So, this is also a point of divergence between secular Morality and Religious Ethics. (shrink)

A superb introduction to the ethical aspects of war and peace, this collection of tightly integrated essays explores the reasons for waging war and for fighting with restraint as formulated in a diversity of ethical traditions, religious and secular. Beginning with the classic debate between political realism and natural law, this book seeks to expand the conversation by bringing in the voices of Judaism, Islam, Christian pacifism, and contemporary feminism. In so doing, it addresses a set of questions: How (...) do the adherents to each viewpoint understand the ideas of war and peace? What attitudes toward war and peace are reflected in these understandings? What grounds for war, if any, are recognized within each perspective? What constraints apply to the conduct of war? Can these constraints be set aside in situations of extremity? Each contributor responds to this set of questions on behalf of the ethical perspective he or she is presenting. The concluding chapters compare and contrast the perspectives presented without seeking to adjudicate their differences. Because of its inclusive, objective, comparative, and dialogic approach, the book serves as a valuable resource for scholars, journalists, policymakers, and anyone else who wants to acquire a better understanding of the range of moral viewpoints that shape current discussion of war and peace. In addition to the editor, the contributors are Joseph Boyle, Michael G. Cartwright, Jean Bethke Elshtain, John Finnis, Sohail H. Hashmi, Theodore J. Koontz, David R. Mapel, Jeff McMahan, Richard B. Miller, Aviezer Ravitzky, Bassam Tibi, Sarah Tobias, and Michael Walzer. (shrink)

The author asks, "Can Christianity still be the moral guide to our fast-changing western society, in its moral confusion and spiritual bankruptcy?" "What is Christian mority and what has it to offer to to the twentieth century man?" In answering these questions, he considers such topics as "Charity and Chastity", "The Family and Society", Crime and Punishment", "The Sanctity of Human Life", and "Peace and War". He has intended the book for the general reader, but hopes that it will be (...) used by students as back-ground reading. (shrink)

This volume, first published in 2004, offers an interesting perspective on the discussion of weapons of mass destruction by broadening the terms of the debate to include both secular and religious investigations not normally considered. The volume contains a structured dialogue between representatives of the following ethical traditions: Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, feminism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, liberalism, natural law, pacifism, and realism. There are two introductory chapters on the technical aspects of WMD and international agreements for controlling WMD. A concluding (...) essay compares the different ethical traditions. All the authors address the same set of moral issues and this creates a dialogue both within and across traditions. The debate structure is particularly useful and appealing for pedagogical purposes. The introductory essays on the technical and legal aspects of WMD could easily be used to introduce the subject to students. (shrink)

This essay proposes an ethics of spirituality as a post-secular question by tracing the legacy of Schleiermacher in Charles Taylor’s account. Given the recent interest in spirituality as a matter of each individual’s perspective and orientation, it is important to explore whether spirituality involves an ethics of spirituality. This question resonates with the ethics of belief in James-Clifford debates and its recent discussions on the non-propositional aspect of belief and its ethical implications for oneself and others. (...) The paper addresses how Schleiermacher and Taylor suggest the ethics of spirituality that demands authentic spirituality and reciprocal communication and recognition, while revealing differences concerning interactions with the institutional church, civil religion, and the civic-cultural frame of rationality and utility. (shrink)

The book covers a long period of the history of British moral philosophy, from the Cam-bridge Platonists to Hume, through Shaftesbury and Hutcheson. The choice of authors, which leaves aside such major figures as Adam Smith and Reid, is justified by the focus on the issue of the relationships between morality and human nature. Hume is the end of the story insofar as he liberates moral theory from a normative conception of human nature so that, contrary to his predecessors, he (...) suggests that ‘good’ is not synonymous with ‘natural’ in the sense that ‘evil’ would be synonymous with ‘unnatural’. Gill’s survey of the British moralists terminates with Hume because it purposes to characterize the “Copernican” inversion carried out by Hume as the result of a gradual shift from an initially “Ptolemaic” position: drawing on Hutcheson’s account of moral judgment, Hume ascribes to psychological states that which traditional moral philosophy used to attribute to the nature of things. Hume goes further than either Shaftesbury or Hutcheson, since he transforms moral philosophy into a theoretical or “metaphysical” undertaking. (shrink)

The national standards for clinical ethics consultation set forth by the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities endorse an “ethics facilitation” approach, which characterizes the role of the ethicist as one skilled at facilitating consensus within the range of ethically acceptable options. To determine the range of ethically acceptable options, ASBH recommends the standard model of decision-making, which is grounded in the values of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. H. Tristram Engelhardt Jr. has sharply criticized the standard model (...) for presuming contentful moral claims in circumscribing the range of ethically acceptable options, which, he argues, cannot be rationally justified in a pluralistic context. Engelhardt’s solution is a secular clinical ethics based on a contentless principle of permission. The first part of this article lays out Engelhardt’s negative claim, that reason cannot establish contentful moral claims, and his positive claim, that secular clinical ethics ought to be based on a contentless principle of permission. The second part critiques these negative and positive claims. The purpose of this paper is to defend secular clinical ethics expertise—defined as the ability of ethicists to offer justified moral recommendations grounded in consensus positions endorsed by the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities—from the radical critiques of Engelhardt, who argues that no moral or metaphysical claims, and hence no bioethical consensus, can be rationally justified. Engelhardt’s critiques have caused some to worry that secular clinical ethics is in a state of theoretical crisis; this article concludes that Engelhardt’s view is an unstable basis for that worry. (shrink)

ABSTRACTThis article investigates Habermas's communicative ethic in relation to changes in the roles of institutions and the state. I reference Alexy, Weber and Taylor, arguing that an artificial delimitation of the public sphere as disparate from the private or religious cramps the capacity of those identified as outsiders to communicate within it. I question the ability of public reason as Habermas has outlined it to meet the challenges it faces regarding interreligious dialogue and integration in democratic societies, and I suggest, (...) instead, an approach more open to dialogue with religions in terms that are more comprehensible to them. (shrink)

Expert opinion on the curriculum of the course "Christian Ethics in Ukrainian Culture" for courses of professional development of pedagogues for the authorship of K. Levkivsky, V. Danilenko and V. Melezhik.

This collection features essays from top experts in ethics and philosophy of love that offer varying perspectives on the value of a contemporary secular virtue of chastity. The virtue of chastity has traditionally been portrayed as an excellent personal disposition concerning the ideal ordering of sexual desire such that the person desires that which is actually good for both the self and others affected by his or her sexual desires and actions. Yet, for roughly the past half century (...) chastity has been increasingly portrayed as an unnecessary ideal with few secular benefits that could not be otherwise obtained. Instead, chastity is sometimes portrayed as an odd kind of religious asceticism with few secular benefits. The essays in this volume ask whether there may be advantages to reconsidering a contemporary virtue of chastity. A recovered and reconceptualized concept of chastity can offer partial solutions to problems associated with externalized sexual desire, including sweeping patterns of sexual harassment, the high divorce/relationship-failure rate, and widespread pornography use. Sexual Ethics in a Secular Age will appeal to researchers and advanced students interested in the philosophy of sex and love, virtue ethics, and philosophical accounts of secularity. (shrink)

Sullivan and Kymlicka seek to provide an alternative to post-9/11 pessimism about the ability of serious ethical dialogue to resolve disagreements and conflict across national, religious, and cultural differences. It begins by acknowledging the gravity of the problem: on our tightly interconnected planet, entire populations look for moral guidance to a variety of religious and cultural traditions, and these often stiffen, rather than soften, opposing moral perceptions. How, then, to set minimal standards for the treatment of persons while developing moral (...) bases for coexistence and cooperation across different ethical traditions? The Globalization of Ethics argues for a tempered optimism in approaching these questions. Its distinguished contributors report on some of the most globally influential traditions of ethical thought in order to identify the resources within each tradition for working toward consensus and accommodation among the ethical traditions that shape the contemporary world. (shrink)

Christian Ethics Introduced asks why humans count as ends in themselves. The biblical answer was/is that humans have standing--inherent worth--as creatures in the image of God. This traditional answer yielded to seventeenth and eighteenth century enlightenment secularism. To these secularists, human reason promised to be a surer and more peaceable foundation for a just culture than religion. Human rationality--the light of human reason--would enlighten and improve the human condition. Two world wars and more realistic trends in new social sciences (...) created not just awareness of human irrationality but fostered skepticism of sound foundations for morality and justice. It seemed that both traditional religion and enlightened reason fell short of what had been hoped. And the cause of failure may not lie in traditional religion or in human irrationality. Rather, the problem might lie in human conduct. Specifically, it may lie in the human inclination to favor self over others, of the "me" outranking the "we." Christian responses to the human failure to live a moral and just life recognize the persistence of immoral conduct, acknowledge it in regard to oneself, ask for forgiveness, and make amends and peace with God and with those wronged. (shrink)