CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of Study
Traditional ethical theories have the main objective of finding a universal moral standard that is valid for all people everywhere and that can help people distinguish which actions are correct and which are incorrect. All these theories can be assigned to general group endonology. The Greek word “DEON” means “duty.” Deontological ethical theories accept the fulfillment of duties as a basis or criterion to judge an action as correct or incorrect. For them,
Men have a duty to perform certain actions whether or not they can foresee any good resulting from them. Some types of behaviour are thus held to be intrinsically right or wrong.[i]
This means that such ethical theorists do not discuss the consequence or the final result of an action to determine its correctness or incorrectness. On the other hand, simply following the established rule justifies the act.
Everyone agrees on this point, but they differ in terms of the origin of the mandatory rule. For Immanuel Kant, it is the categorical imperative, while Emil Brunner considers it a divine imperative of God. Kant as a deontologist strongly believes that moral laws are good or bad from the beginning. Empirical moral experiences or circumstances do not influence the value of the action. The ethical theory of ethics states that “the rules apply regardless of whether they promote good or not.”[ii] This means that the law is absolute. How it affects the recipient remains unclear. Compliance with the law justifies the demand. In this way, however, the legalist is not in contact with the needs of man. It suppresses the individuality and creativity of man and emphasizes obedience from the outside instead of the motive. Forget that man is a rational and dynamic being; which is constantly evolving and, therefore, the need to overcome the above qualities. The legalist wants to program the actions of the human being. Therefore, it deals with what the law says and what is applicable in each situation.
The school of teleological thought, on the other hand, considers that circumstances determine the value of an action. Therefore, value is not enshrined in any act or legislation. They affirm that it is the motive of the actor that determines the value of this action. The Greek word “TELOS” means “END” or “PURPOSE”. For them, “no behavior is right or wrong by nature: an action is only correct if it produces or tends to produce good results.”[iii] But the next question is, which is good. Jeremy Bentham, J.S. Mill and many others believe that joy and happiness are good. Fletcher assumes that the good thing is agape love. John Wilson calls these two schools morality and reality. The latter considers moral rules as a guide. That’s what Fletcher calls an illuminator, they
Have no particular validity on themselves, no absolute authority. If they serve human ends, they are good rules. If they do not, they can be scrapped.[iv]
Wilson summarizes his opinion that “the right attitude towards morality is a rational attitude.”[v] This implies that one must consider the facts given in relation to their particular situations before acting. Robinson states that there is no responsible man who considers love and the law as opposites. They should be seen as a complement to each other.[vi]
Frankena says that moral philosophy arises only when man passes the stage of directing traditional and conventional rules. Moral philosophy is when a man critically reviews his rules and decides why he chooses to do something and not something else. He believes that the human being who makes the decisions represents him as the true moral agent that he is, instead of the robot, while behaving. Because it is not possible to transform everything that man finds into laws. Hence the need to make aposteriori laws and not a priori. The situationist argues that, although the letter of the law is good, the spirit, the intention of the law is better. As a result, the spirit of the law must win the lead. Introduction to the ethics of the situation: the new moral Joseph Fletcher (1905-1991) develops what he calls the non-ethical system. His book triggered a “firestorm” in public because it legitimized the general dissatisfaction with the postwar authority. At the time it was written, there seemed to be radical claims that it is not wrong to have extramarital
[i] B. O. Eboh, Living Issues in Ethics (Nsukka: Afro-Orbis pub. Company, 2005) p.34
[ii] Brunner, E. The Divine Imperative. London: Lutterworth Press, 1953.
[iii] Frankena, W.K. Ethics New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. 1973.
[iv] Fletcher, J. Situation Ethics The Morality, London: S.C.M. Press. 1966.
[v] Wilson, W.D. The Right And The Good. London: University Press. 1930.
[vi] Robinson, J.A.T. Honest To God, London: S.C.M. Press. 1963.
