MARCH,1946 83 tradictinghimself.Thequestioniswhatisthetruthof themater. It iseasytoseethatrelativismisdestructive ofethics,butinviewoftheactualvariationofbeliefon ethicalquestionsrelativismishardtogetawayfrom. TheProgressofEthics Ibelievethatthisnegativeconclusionisnotinevitable. Anabsoluteethiccanbestated,oratleastoutlined.How thiscanbedoneissuggestedinanarticlebyJ.N.Findlay in Mind (April,1944), towhichwhatfolowsowes muFcohr . re. a. sonswhicharenotdifficulttosuggest,thehistoryofhomicideisrelativelystraightforward.Homicide mustalwayshavebeenprohibitedordinarilywithinthe socialunit,exceptwhencommitedbythechief.Thedirec- tionsofchangehavebeenthese:enlargementofthebounds withinwhichit isordinarilyprohibited,untilthesenow includethewholehumanrace;abolitionofclass-privileged homicide(byslave-owners,king,samuraietc.);abolition ofceremonialhomicide(religioussacrifice,dueling);reductionofcustomaryhomicide(killingoffofthehelpless agedorunwantedinfants);reductionofthevarietyofcircumstancesinwhichhomicideislegal,till it isnowal- mostconfinedtopunishmentformurder;reductionofthe killingofwar-prisoners;andearnestbuthithertounsuc- cessfuleffortstoabolishwar. Thereishereaclearthreadofethicalprinciple.The historyofhomicideisnotachaoticjumble."Thoushalt donomurder"hasneverbeenacompletestatementof theprincipleofanysociety,but ithasalwaysbeenthe guidingprinciple,andthenumberofexceptionshasstead- ilydecreased,andthetaskofdefendingthemintermsof thegeneralwelfarehasbecomelessdifficult.Thiswe recognizeconfidentlyasaprogressivechange. Ithascome aboutinawaywhichisprobablytypical. Acustomor lawwhichishistoricallyconditionedisdrawnup,asit were,havinginviewbothpurelyethicalandothercon- siderations.Incourseoftimetheseotherfactors,economic, social,technical,willchange,butthepurelyethicalfactor willremainatleastrelativelyconstant.Ourhistoryhas beenoneofincreasingsocialstability,enlargementofthe efectivesocialunit,decreaseintherigidityofclass-distinctions(atleastforthelasttwomilennia),andincreas- ingcontrolofnature;andthesechangesaresuchasto permitthepurelyethicalelementinmoralcustomorlaw tobecomemoreevident. Aninterestingprospectivechangeinthemoralityof homicide,apparentlyinthereversedirection,iseuthanasia. Thisishoweverintendednotasanexceptiontotheprinciple ofnohomicidebutasafulfilmentoftheprincipleofno cruelty.Andwhatevertheiratitudetoeuthanasia,cruelty isamateronwhichevenprofessedrelativistswillhaveno doubt.Thebanontheintentionalinflictionofpainisnow approachingtheabsolute,andwearequitesurethaton thispointwearerightandourcalousancestorswrong. NothingtheNazishavedone,eventheirmassmurders,has bensoshockingastheirrevivaloftortureandtraining oftheiryoungmenin"hardness".. . . Itwouldbewearisometodiscussallthetraditionalmoral principles,andI"thinkifwedidsothesamesortofconclusionwouldemerge.Theextentofthevariationin moralsislessthaniscommonlysupposed,andthana BibliotecaGinoBianco superficialglanceatthevarietyofcustomwouldsuggest. Ifwegetatthepurposeinthesetraditionalruleswefind afairdegreeofuniformity.Thereishoweverabroad changeintime,whichwerecognizewithsomeconfidence asgeneralyprogressive,i.e.achangetowardsabsolutely rightprinciples.Factorswhichhaveassistedthischange aretheprogresstowardstheunificationofmankind,bythe breakingdownofnationalandclassbarriers,i.e.anapproachtowardsequality,theimprovementinpolitical stability,policingetc.,andsoinpublicorderandgeneral behaviour,whichhaveenabledtheindividualtosethim- selfhigherstandards,theincreaseinourcontrolofnature, thedeclineinsuperstition,andtheincreasedapplication ofreasontoethics. TowardsanAbsoluteEthic Theconsummationofthesedevelopmentsmightbeexpectedtobetherecognitionofasinglesupremeprinciple. Manybelievethatthisgoalhasbeenachieved,theprinciple beingofcoursethatofthegeneralwelfare,orinsome- whatarchaiclanguagethegreatesthappinessofthegreatestnumber. I t isstill amatterofcontroversywhether fromthisprinciplecanbededucedtheotherprinciples whichwerecogniseashavingahighdegreeofvalidity, suchasobeyingthelaw,tellingthetruth,keepingpromises, respectingpeople'spossession,showinggratitudetowards benefactors,refrainingfrominflictingpain,respectinglife, andsoon.Thedisputeisinteresting,butoflittleprac- ticalimportance,andofnoconcerntous. Itremainstodiscusswelfare.Therehasprobablybeen lesschangeinideasonthisthanonduties.Fromthe beginningofdiscussionofthesubjectthemaintypesof valuewererecognised.Thetrendtowardsademocratic outlookmaybediscernedinthegreaterstressonvaluesor welfarenowthaninearliertimesalldutiesandnorights maybeadmirablewhenvoluntarilyundertakenbyapuri- tan,butwhenimposedonothersitisaslavemorality.The democratictrendisalsoshowninourconceptionofvalue, whichisbroaderthantheratherintelectualandmoralistic ideasoftheoldacademies.Werecogniseahierarchyof values,butalsoseethathumannaturevaries,andsoclaim thateachmanhasaright,atleastwithinverywidelimits, tothekindof lifeheprefers.Accordinglythedoctrine ofwelfare,whileassertingthebasiccommonneeds,health, foodetc.,becomesbeyondthatequivalenttothedemand foropportunitytodevelopthepersonalitythatis,freedom. Thusitcanbesaidthatthereisan absolute ethic,towardswhichthought,andevenconduct,aremoving,and towhichapproximatethetheoreticalbeliefs,orperhaps rathertheemotionalimpulses,ofmostmen.Thisethicis nothingnew:Leninwasliterallycorrectwhenhesaidit hadbeenpreachedforthousandsofyears. Itseemstohave ariseninthefirstmilenniumB.C.,perhapsinresponse totravelers'reportsorpoliticaldevelopmentswhichfirst suggestedthepossibilityoftheunificationofmankind. Whatevermayhavebeentrueinthepast,moralitynowis notaclass-morality,butisapproachingauniversalorhu manmorality.Thereareofcoursemanyremnantsof olderideas,butanyonewhosememorygoesbackbefore 1914willadmitthattheyaremereremnants.Thetypical modernmemberoftheprivilegedclassesornationsno longerdefendshisprivilegesasjustordesirable.He
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExMDY2NQ==