introduction
❖ Conscience: a moral faculty or feeling prompting us to see that certain actions are right or wrong.
bible general
bible - paul
o Uses term synderesis = human ability to know and choose the good (Aquinas)
o Taught all know what is right and wrong
o Romans 2:14: ‘Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by law’ (Suggests there is an innate sense of guidance)
o Romans 2:15: ‘They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts’ (Imago dei?)
o Conscience is the universal knowledge of God’s law
o Conscience can be corrupted (Augustine – abundance of sin), but through Christ’s redeeming love and the HS, we can ‘put on the mind of Christ’. Church teachings will help keep pure.
newman - conscience innate voice of god
criticism of Newman
o However… doesn’t tell us where to place Scripture. Could argue weight on conscience is due to context of the inadequate Pope during his lifetime. (Pope Pius IX)
o Personal engagement with self-assessing Church teaching is completely subjective, conscience can be self-centred
palmer
Newman’s argument is seriously flawed. For not only would it do equally well supporting polytheism, it also provides no means of establishing whether the voice heard (if it is heard at all), far from being divine, is in fact demonic
bishop Joseph butler - faculty of reflection
criticisms of butler
o Self-esteem should not be the basis of conscience, conscience should convict when we are wrong rather than to make humans think they are good
o Optimism re. human nature has been undermined by moral evil throughout history
plato and conscience
augustine
aquinas summary
aquinas’ view is more rational than Augustine/newman
aquinas and ratio
aquinas - reason to help figure out what is right or wrong
♣ Can use synderesis (practical reason) to discern what God wants for humanity
♣ Leads to 5 Primary Precepts, not laws, simply God’s purpose for humanity
♣ Derive laws from Primary Precepts using conscientia (secondary precepts)
♣ As we practice balancing our needs against the needs of others, we develop prudence (the virtue of right reasoning)
♣ ‘All acts of virtue are prescribed by the natural law: since one’s reason naturally dictates to him to act virtuously’
♣ ‘Not all virtuous acts are prescribed by natural law’ (must use reason to derive/interpret the virtuous acts from the primary precepts)
♣ E.g. homosexuality: ordered society (against nuclear unit), reproduction (cannot reproduce) and worship of God (against Scripture). Thus, homosexuality goes against Natural Law.
♣ Uses Romans 1:20, which suggests that we can move from the knowledge of this world to knowledge of the eternal law.
♣ Morality is not simply about doing that which is accepted by the many, what is culturally, socially or politically moral. (Unlike Freud)
aquinas, wrong synderesis
aquinas, conscientia
aquinas, prudence
aquinas and ignorance general
o Aquinas does not agree with the concept of guilt as a ‘feeling in your heart’, it is rather a process of reasoning teamed with types of innocence.
o Aquinas said that a person’s conscience could go wrong either invincibly or vincibly.
o Either innocent (invincible) or culpable (vincible)
aquinas and vincible ignorance general
♣ Lack of knowledge for which a person is morally responsible
♣ Has implications on punishment: punishment should be harsher if make no effort to clear ignorance
♣ It is culpable ignorance because it could be cleared up if the person made enough effort to learn what should be known
♣ Guilt can be lessened if the lack of knowledge is not directly willed but is due to neglect or laziness e.g. Mary Bell – diminished responsibility
♣ Affected ignorance – when one is deliberately ignorant in order not to be inhibited in one wants to do = more guilt
♣ ‘Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don’t know because we don’t want to know’ – Aldous Huxley
aquinas and vincible ignorance link to NL
♣ Link to NL
• Must educate in order to avoid vincible ignorance (one of PP)
• Educate our reason with Scripture and Church teachings (Divine Law and Natural Law)
• Educating our reason is more crucial because of the Fall and thus has the potential to be used wrongly. Vincible ignorance needs to be overcome with education of reason.
♣ Link to Aristotle (see evaluation section)
♣ Plato would argue against this (see evaluation section)
invincible ignorance example of dresden
♣ Bombing of Dresden
• Gov terror bombed Dresden, killed up to 60,000 innocent people
• Vincible error – they knew it was wrong
• A bomb was dropped on a weapons factory, school hidden underneath. Did not know about the school and thus it was an invincible error.
invincible ignorance example, money to man on street
♣ E.g. giving money to man on street
• Intention = good
• Action actually keeps him on the streets for longer
• I erred vincibly, would have done differently if I’d thought about it
• Would have been much better if I had given money to homeless charity that would have the experience to effectively help him. However, I did not know that workers at this charity were abusing the homeless people in their care. Supporting the charity was actually the wrong thing to do, but I couldn’t have known this – I erred invincibly.
general positives of aquinas
aquinas positives - Aristotle influence
• Misuse of synderesis because of apparent goods mirrors Aristotle’s view that we can know the good but fail to do it because we have fallen into bad habits.
o Aristotle considers 2 factors which may excuse someone from being blamed: ignorance and lack of choice. Aquinas develops this in his teaching that to commit a sin, one needs full knowledge and full consent. (Invincible ignorance)
Aristotle distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary decisions, highlighting how judging responsibility of an individual must be assessed according to the particular situation: ‘we punish a man for his ignorance, if he is considered responsible for the ignorance (…) and we punish those who are ignorant of anything in the laws that they ought to know that is not difficult to find out’
general negatives of aquinas
• Removes emotion and guilt from moral decision-making.
• Can use reason wrongly
• Some people have mental illnesses – could argue they do not fully have reason
• Same Natural and Ethical laws guide all human beings, does not take into account cultural relativity of laws, which may vary the conscience.
• People can reach totally different conclusions when using their consciences. (Aquinas would argue that this wouldn’t happen if they were using right reason)
• Could argue against Aquinas’ insistence on God-given conscience. Aquinas recognises that although conscience is God-given, it is capable of error, thus could argue that conscience is something that all minds are capable of, thus rendering his theory secular.
Plato would argue against Aquinas’
aquinas negatives - butler and newman
• Butler and Newman find it less straightforward than Aquinas to account for errors in the application of conscience. Newman deals with it by arguing we sometimes have a false conscience by listening to our desires and telling ourselves that our conscience is speaking.
o Butler assumes that if we only attended to it, our God-given conscience would give us the right answers.