Could you please try to describe some of these moral-ethical systems the best you can? I am not the sharpest tool in the shed so go easy on me. Thank you.
Like i am the sharpest?
heck Frank, heck no - but i’ll do my best.
Well, your probably familiar with some sort of variation of the Enlightenment style values. You might say God gets kicked off the altar and human Reason gets put in its place. Its the general apotheosis of man - ie: we’re such great beings because of our capacity to Reason.
All relatively boring stuff in my opinion. This thing tends to run on two tracks that either:
A.) Want to make a Metaphysical claim that because we can discover “Laws of Nature” in terms of physics and chemistry, we can derive an ethical code by observing both the natural world and the natural drives/behaviors of people.
B.) Glorify the capacity to Reason. As if one could somehow provide an objective foundation from the mere laws of logic itself.
But let me hit you up with a more interesting alternative: Epicureanism.
Now, to be honest, it would be more fair to say that Epicurus was a Deist. However his God(s) don’t lower themselves to interact with humanity. Human morality is completely and totally a subject of disinterest. Furthermore Epicurus’ gods are not the be all/end all. Metaphysically the universe is made of atoms, we’re made of atoms, and yes the Gods are made of atoms - which means they can be destroyed.
The source of Morality must be found someplace else then Divinity. Here’s a little tidbit from wikipedia that might explain more:
The philosophy originated by Epicurus flourished for seven centuries. It propounded an ethic of individual pleasure as the sole or chief good in life. Hence, Epicurus advocated living in such a way as to derive the greatest amount of pleasure possible during one’s lifetime, yet doing so moderately in order to avoid the suffering incurred by overindulgence in such pleasure. The emphasis was placed on pleasures of the mind rather than on physical pleasures. Therefore, according to Epicurus, with whom a person eats is of greater importance than what is eaten. Unnecessary and, especially, artificially produced desires were to be suppressed. Since learning, culture, and civilization as well as social and political involvements could give rise to desires that are difficult to satisfy and thus result in disturbing one’s peace of mind, they were discouraged. Knowledge was sought only to rid oneself of religious fears and superstitions, the two primary fears to be eliminated being fear of the gods and of death. Viewing marriage and what attends it as a threat to one’s peace of mind, Epicurus lived a celibate life but did not impose this restriction on his followers.
The philosophy was characterized by an absence of divine principle. Lawbreaking was counseled against because of both the shame associated with detection and the punishment it might bring. Living in fear of being found out or punished would take away from pleasure, and this made even secret wrongdoing inadvisable. To the Epicureans, virtue in itself had no value and was beneficial only when it served as a means to gain happiness. Reciprocity was recommended, not because it was divinely ordered or innately noble, but because it was personally beneficial. Friendships rested on the same mutual basis, that is, the pleasure resulting to the possessors. Epicurus laid great emphasis on developing friendships as the basis of a satisfying life.
Subsequently, the Epicureans were targeted by the Platonics, the Neo-Platonics, the Aristotleans, the Stoics, etc since all of them were under the later impression that in fact no moral code existed for the Epicureans.
In fact, in a rather odd and surprising situation, there’s even a Jewish Mishnah that states the Epicureans will NOT share in the “World to Come.” That tends to be a rarity in Judaism when a group is explicitly shunned.
