In Kantian ethics greatest good is only
something that people could hope for: moral actions certainly
wouldn't guarantee that one would find greatest good, although they
would undoubtedly make one deserve it. In the days of pre-Kantian
innocence, one could still believe that the connection between good
actions and greatest goodness could be positively proven. Indeed, we
have seen that Wolff simply states moral actions to aim at nothing
else but the growth of the perfection in oneself and in others. The
perfection itself is best one could hope for, but just as a further
incentive, God is willing to make anyone happy who wants to act in a
moral manner.
Doing the right thing becomes then a
mere question of mental calculation: in each situation, you should
determine the best possible outcome you could hope for and the most
suitable means for acheiving the outcome – and then you already
have incentive enough for doing the thing. The final goal should then
be organizing all the actions so that they are geared towards the
perfection of oneself and others.
The idea of people actually solving all
their problems through an ethical calculus sounds quite fabulous.
Indeed, Wolff himself admits that actual moral problems are usually
too detailed for any humanly calculus. Instead, the ideal of ethical
calculus should be applied only to the problem of discovering general
principles of action. Thus, an investigator of ethics should try to
discover which actions in general work for the human perfection and
which hinder its progress. A prudent person would then just follow
these general principles, even if they did not hold perfectly in any
particular case, because he would understand their reliability.
Still, one might still be uncertain how
Wolff would account for the cases where a person acts against such
principles due to sensuous influences and desires. Wolff's strategy
is to rely on his theory of sensations as a source of confused
information. Conflict between ethical reasoning and sensuous desires
becomes thus a conflict between two kinds of information: clear and
distinct vs. dark and indistinct. A person could in theory free
herself from the slavery of sensuous infuences through a perfect
clarification and analysis of her consciousness. In practice, this is
impossible for human beings, thus they must pit sensuous influences
against one another.
Wolff ponders also the possibility of
using sensuousness as a general instrument for advocating morality in
society at large by representing difficult ethical thoughts through
symbolism and ceremonies. Wolff has probably in his mind at least the
sacraments of church, but when he discusses how one could invent as
rational symbols and ceremonies as possible, Wolff's ideas start to
resemble Adam Weishaupt's later society of Illuminati and the more
traditional freemasonry. One might wonder if Wolff himself was part
of some masonic lodge.
Next time we shall learn how to read
other people's minds.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti