Returning to the issue of ethics and charity:
It is established to my satisfaction that ethical systems as an end (whether categorical or derived from divine dictates) are destructive to true charity, because they use people as a means to another end. Further, charitable actions need no metaphysical justification such as a God who dictates them, their value is intrinsic and readily apparent in the performance of the act--though perhaps not in an explicit way. With this said, what possible relation can God have to charitable actions?
It could be proposed that the ethical rules given by God in themselves are not ends but means: they teach us how to live charitably. Thus the performance of a charitable act is not done in order to satisfy an ethical guideline; instead the ethical guideline is given to bring about charitable acts. This should not be understood as forcing charitable acts with the threat of punishment, but as teaching people how to benefit others. In this understanding of ethics one does not help another person in order to be ethical, one is ethical in order to help other people. In this way, ethical systems need not be destructive to charity. (Additionally, the issue of incongruities between ethical systems is not quite so troubling.)
But is this all that can be said? There seems to be little room for God as anyone is capable of generating ethical laws (and indeed, ethical laws are not necessary for charity). Further, stopping here seems to limit us to mere humanism. I will attempt a phenomenological investigation.
In an act of charity, love is manifested. However, it does not arise as an effect arises from a cause. If this were the case, love could not supersede charity, but would be dependent on it. Love, properly speaking, does not arise from charity, yet it is present in it. In charity, love is not a relationship between two people, because then it would be in some sense divisive--it would be between them. Rather, it is what precedes charity as a precondition. Phenomenally, it is an "opening" which allows people to truly experience one another. It is an existential possibility, one which is actualized through charity, one which opens us to charity, and one which allows us to be authentically present with one another. In Heideggerian terms, love is what allows authentic "being-with-others." This deserves more thought, and to be worked out more precisely.
It is established to my satisfaction that ethical systems as an end (whether categorical or derived from divine dictates) are destructive to true charity, because they use people as a means to another end. Further, charitable actions need no metaphysical justification such as a God who dictates them, their value is intrinsic and readily apparent in the performance of the act--though perhaps not in an explicit way. With this said, what possible relation can God have to charitable actions?
It could be proposed that the ethical rules given by God in themselves are not ends but means: they teach us how to live charitably. Thus the performance of a charitable act is not done in order to satisfy an ethical guideline; instead the ethical guideline is given to bring about charitable acts. This should not be understood as forcing charitable acts with the threat of punishment, but as teaching people how to benefit others. In this understanding of ethics one does not help another person in order to be ethical, one is ethical in order to help other people. In this way, ethical systems need not be destructive to charity. (Additionally, the issue of incongruities between ethical systems is not quite so troubling.)
But is this all that can be said? There seems to be little room for God as anyone is capable of generating ethical laws (and indeed, ethical laws are not necessary for charity). Further, stopping here seems to limit us to mere humanism. I will attempt a phenomenological investigation.
In an act of charity, love is manifested. However, it does not arise as an effect arises from a cause. If this were the case, love could not supersede charity, but would be dependent on it. Love, properly speaking, does not arise from charity, yet it is present in it. In charity, love is not a relationship between two people, because then it would be in some sense divisive--it would be between them. Rather, it is what precedes charity as a precondition. Phenomenally, it is an "opening" which allows people to truly experience one another. It is an existential possibility, one which is actualized through charity, one which opens us to charity, and one which allows us to be authentically present with one another. In Heideggerian terms, love is what allows authentic "being-with-others." This deserves more thought, and to be worked out more precisely.
0 comments:
Post a Comment