Forgive me for this post, but I will go deep into philosophy here in an attempt to explain a major influence on my views of ethics. The study of ethics is one central element or study found in philosophy, and is often something the ‘real world’ covets yet knows little about. In a philosophy class, one might read Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, or study Kant’s categorical imperatives, for instance. Of course, there’s Bentham and Mill’s utilitarian ethics and newer takes such as care and communitarian ethics. From this, we can already see that no single ethic fits the bill for everyone and every context.

One of the books I read on the subject, aside from works on each of the above ethics, was G. E. Moore’s classic Principia Ethica. Moore’s perspective of ethics is interesting to me given his contrast between a naturalistic (I would consider Aristotelian, although he does not do so) ethic, a hedonistic (perhaps Epicurean or utilitarian) ethic, and a metaphysical (I would consider Platonist, which he mentions) ethic.

He sums up a long-held dichotomy in philosophy: The ‘hic et nunc’ versus the ‘eternal.’ This is the contrast between the ‘here and now,’ temporal view of human existence, and the eternal, universal existence that transcends our present, physical bounds. In some ways, Moore’s summation embodies the debate between the classical sophists and the philosophers up until the Enlightenment (the philosophical shift back toward humans as the only universal rather than something ‘out there’ began with David Hume and Voltaire, culminating in Friedrich Nietzsche, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Richard Rorty). Prior to the shift toward postmodernity, philosophy was concerned with the search for universal truth and transcendent knowledge (Descartes flipped this on its head with his doubting and subsequent cogito ergo sum).

The sophists, in contrast, following Protagoras, believed that ‘man was the measure of all things,’ and whatever might be ‘out there’ had no immediate bearing on human existence. They were the ones who gave us rhetoric. Following this, Moore’s book displays an argumentative tone that is not combative, but explicative or even rhetorical. His take is informative and embraces a skepticism and openness about ethics I have not seen in many other writers who follow the philosophical viewpoint of universals.

Building on my last statement, Moore takes what has been said about ethics (from Aristotle to Sidgwick) and asks them what we should do with these assertions. His willingness to look for an ethic that was situated in a given historical context and applicable to present situations is novel for his time and still needed today, in my opinion.

Throughout the book, Moore attempts to answer the question, “What is ‘good’ and how does our definition of ‘good’ inform our ways of living in the world? ‘Good’ for Moore is always a stand-in for something else. The something else is, metaphorically, a subjectively situated understanding of the definition. Some critics might say this subjectively situated understanding is relativistic. Dostoevsky noted through his characters that if God is dead, in the Nietzschean fashion, then all things are permitted. How do we have an ethic that doesn’t permit everything while also allowing us freedom and agency in various contexts and cultures?  

This is where studying ethics is a personal endeavor. For me, at this point in my life, I have adopted a postmodern frame and rarely look to universals for how I should live, if I can help it. I am much more interested in and focused on the here and now of my reality. Yes, there is a history and culture I am situated in, but learning means transcending that to arrive at a new understanding of myself. ‘Good,’ for me, is the little things I can enjoy (a cup of coffee, perhaps in a Camusian sense, or a cup of tea in a Dostoevskian) without the need to generalize it all of humanity.

This local, personal view of good helps me focus on the person across from me, a conviction from their humanity impacting mine, rather than a conviction toward something universal and external to us. Moore’s Principia Ethica helped me see this better. It’s dense, but an excellent entrance into a long-standing conversation.

If you are interested in supporting the ongoing content here at The Philosophical Fighter, you can check out my shop or simply buy me a coffee. I appreciate any and all support, and thank you for reading.