One of the themes that runs throughout the course is how we define ourselves as human. For Russell and Plato, to be human is to wonder, to explore the intellectual possibilities of life. Later in in the eastern paradigm we will see that Buddha agrees with Aristotle that to be human is to live a life of moderation. We will see that for Confucius and the Bhagavad-Gita, to be human is to understand one’s duty and our interconnection to others and the cosmos. Then the Native American paradigm will explain that being human entails a interconnection and responsibility to all of nature. All these explanation imply that to be human involves a great sense of responsibility. This sense of responsibility fits within the teleological context of our human condition.
For this essay use the readings from this section as a springboard to explore the human ethical condition. After doing so come up with your own description of what it mean to be human. Your answer will contain two parts:
Part 1: Human Ethical Condition – What humans are
Explore and explain the key traits or characteristics of our human ethical condition. What traits or abilities make us ethical beings (able to consider ourselves and others in our actions)? Be sure to focus on our abilities beyond our physical form.
Concepts like reasoning, social (mutually dependent on ourselves and others to survive and thrive), emotional, active and interactive should come in handy. Be sure to explain what makes them what they are. For example, do not merely state that we are reasoning beings – explain what is meant by a faculty of reason.
Part 2: Human Telos*: What we want
Describe what human beings want from their lives. What is our ultimate purpose? Why we go to school, start a family, live in a community, etc. What are we ultimately seeking to fulfill with these actions and interactions?
Concepts like happiness, security, stability, well-being, peace may come to mind. Once you settle on a concept or two, you will need to go beyond merely stating them – you will need to explain what these things are. Teach the reader what you mean by “happiness” or “peace.”
*Note: Telos = teleological goal, the natural ultimate end goal or purpose of a thing. Aristotle, for example, explains that the telos of a builder is to build well. The telos of a bird could be described as flying well. The telos of a thing is based on the natural metaphysical essence or form of the thing in question. So, if humans are reasoning beings, then it would logically follow that the human telos would involve thinking and contemplation. For a further explanation on teleology see module 3 reading materials in “Western Paradigm Ethical Systems.”
Option 2:Â Ethics and Metaphysics
While “ethics” is a familiar term, the relationship between metaphysics and ethical evaluation is a new idea to many. For most “ethics” begins and ends with what should or ought be done. This approach pays little to no attention to what something is – the metaphysical being of the object itself. In philosophical ethics – and the process which it involves – the “is” description (or forms of things) is of critical importance.
For option two, explore the relationship between the metaphysical forms and ethical evaluation. You will do so in two parts:
Part 1: Briefly explain the essence, or first principles, of ethical actions and behaviors.
What is ethics? What makes “ethics” what it is and not something else?
In answering these questions start by addressing the sub-questions implied within – What makes a context an ethical context? What makes an ethical action a correct ethical action? What/whom does ethics or ethical actions involve? How does it involve them?
Part 2: What role do the metaphysical forms play in ethical evaluation? (see module 2 materials for a greater description of “metaphysical forms”)
If ethical evaluation is about standards of correct interpersonal actions and behaviors, what standards are to be used to evaluate a particular ethical act?
Do standards of ethical evaluation begin and end at the personal or cultural level or is there a standard that transcends these realms? If it is the personal or cultural, how can an action between persons from different cultures (or species) be evaluated? If ethical evaluation aims at impartiality, how can such a standard be discovered? Is it possible to judge a particular act or object by its general metaphysical form? These are the key questions for part two.