Has social need become the reason for morality, rather than inner necessity? What determines a a person’s ethical being?
Ethics is not really what we learnt in philosophy class. It should not be a calculation of good and evil, but rather an attempt to grow into a divine nature. Or at least this is the difference between western and eastern philosophy. In the east it is believed that acts of sympathy and charity are results of divine love. Fulfillment and true ethics is not about actions that make a person’s nature, but rather when their nature gives value to their actions. So we are not virtuous by action nor by being artificially moral, but by becoming more natural. Rationality does not bring fulfillment, instead, inspiration from divine knowledge makes rationality more conscious in ones nature. Ethics is not something that is communicated but it shows in the presence of a person’s being.
To simplify this, what truly inspires one’s action, is the greatest determining factor of ethics- What is the intention. Anyone can perform good deeds right? So would you say this instantly makes them a good person? One who does good because of who they are, is much more admirable. By simply having pure intention and being “good”in essence, we automatically become ethical, rational and fulfilled. Ethics then become a result of our action, not a reason for it. A truly ethical person obeys an inner ideal, not an outer standard. They answer to a divine law, in their being, not to a social claim. The ethical imperative comes not from around, but from within them.
The strange thing is that nobody can really tell where your ethical imperative comes from, only you can. So all this classification and wordiness is really just a whole lot of fun for the intellectual. All I truly know is that we should set our intentions straight, before trying so hard to be moral beings – I’m almost certain all good things will follow 😉