Article contents
Extract
Belief in the ultimacy and distinctiveness of ethical principles has been challenged in many ways to-day. The advance of science, especially in the fields of psychology and anthropology, has provided the relativist and the sceptic with many new weapons to put in their armoury; and the positivist has launched a very subtle attack. The present state of society, both in the internal affairs of the peoples of the world and in their inter-relations, has brought many moral principles into contempt. But there have also been notable advances, especially where more self-effacing virtue is concerned. Philosophers have also rebutted the attacks of the sceptic with peculiar incisiveness and vigour; indeed we know better to-day than at any other time just what we must hold if the objectivity of ethics is to be maintained. How the battle is going is by no means easy to determine. But there is one corner of the field, and that the one from which the most powerful attack of all may be delivered, which the upholder of the ultimacy of moral truths has left almost wholly undefended, so lightly does he estimate the danger from that quarter. That is the religious one. Account has been taken of the arguments of the sociologist and the Freudian psychologist, but it has been assumed, with astonishing naïveté, that religion is an ally to be wholly relied upon. But morality and religion have often been in conflict, and they seem to be so as much as ever to-day. For some of the most powerful forces in our religious life, and those which are in some ways most attuned to our needs, seem to be wholly inimical to the moral life. It is with this aspect of the vast problem of morality and religion that we can best concern ourselves in a course with the general title of “Moral and Political Conflicts of Our Time.”.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1949
References
page 43 note 1 Cf. Camfield, F. W., Reformation Old and New, p. 28Google Scholar.
page 43 note 2 Op. cit. p. 97.
page 44 note 1 Cf. Carritt, E. F., Ethical and Political Thinking, p. 3Google Scholar.
page 45 note 1 Reformation, Old and New, p. 90.
page 45 note 2 Cf. H. J. Paton, “The Good Will” and Campbell, C. A., “Moral and Non-Moral Values,”. Mind, Vol. XLIVGoogle Scholar.
page 46 note 1 Cf. L. A. Reid, The Rediscovery of Belief, chap. ix.
page 47 note 1 There may of course be distinctive religious obligations, but that is quite another matter.
page 47 note 2 One should note here also the close similarity between Barth's teaching and that of the vedantic writings. Cf. W. S. Urquart, Humanism and Christianity, chap. vi.
page 48 note 1 Brunner, . God and Man, p. 78Google Scholar.
page 48 note 2 Cf. Reformation Old and New, Camfield, pp. 5 and 85.
page 48 note 3 Brunner, , God and Man, pp. 81Google Scholar.
page 48 note 4 Op. cit. p. 83.
page 48 note 5 Italics, mine.
page 48 note 6 op.cit. p.85.
page 51 note 1 Cf. E. F. Carritt, Ethical and Political Thinking, chap. ii.
page 52 note 1 The Doctrine of the Word of God, p. 80.
page 52 note 2 The Church and the Political Problem, p. 58.
page 53 note 1 Humanism and Christianity, p. 125.
- 1
- Cited by