In a recent post, I drew attention to a political and ethical tension: the government's position in the United States to permit gendercide (or female foeticide), which is legal, and the ostensible position of the United States government with respect to other countries regarding the same permitted termination of life, which the Secretary of State has said should be prohibited.
Shortly after making that blog entry, I ran across the following discussion of ethical matters in ancient Greece. It has to do with the development of moral theory and practice from Homeric myth to fifth-century Athens. In his A Short History of Ethics, Alasdair MacIntyre discusses the tug of war between nomos (law, custom, convention) and physis (nature), the order of society and the order of the universe, as it relates to one's understanding of virtue and moral expressions within cultures and across them. I take it that this tug of war is parallel to the tension in the U.S. domestic approach to gendercide through selective abortion and its foreign approach to the same question.
I offer the following, then, as evidence of the enduring benefits of a classical education. The tension in the U.S. is not new. The Athenians, too, were conflicted. Who knew, right, that an account of the development of moral reasoning in ancient Greece could be, well, just so relevant to contemporary discussions? It is. What, then, might we learn about justice from their experience and moral investigations that can help to improve ours?
Between Homer and writers five centuries later there is a great change in Greek myths about the order of the universe. The Homeric myth does reflect, though with much distortion, the workings of an actual society in which a close form of functional organization is presupposed by the moral and evaluative forms of appraisal which are in use. The later assertions of order in the universe reflect not a structure that is, but one that was, or one that is struggling to survive. They are conservative protests against the disintegration of the older forms and the transition to the city-state. The myths themselves cannot but open up the question of the difference between the order of the universe and the order of society. But above all, this question is sharpened by a widening awareness of radically different social orders.
The impact of the Persian invasions, of colonization, of increase in trade and therefore in travel, all these brings home the fact of different cultures. The result is that the distinction between what holds good in Egypt but not in Persia, or in Athens but not in Megara, on the one hand, and what is the case universally as part of the order of things becomes overwhelmingly important. The question asked about any moral rule or social practice is, Is it part of the essentially local realm of nomos (convention, custom) or of the essentially universal realm of physis (nature)? Linked to this is of course the question, Is it open to me to choose what rules I shall make my own or what restraints I shall observe (as it may be open to me to choose which city I shall live in and what therefore shall be the nomos by which I live)? or does the nature of the universe set limits upon what I may legitimately choose? (MacIntyre, Short History, 10-11)
… Different cities observe different customs and different laws. Does and should justice differ from city to city? Does justice hold only within a given community between citizens? or should it hold also between cities? The Athenians condemn the character of Alcibiades because he did not observe the restraints of dikaiosune in his behavior within the Athenian state. But their own envoys behave just like Alcibiades in their attitude toward other states. That is, they equate what is morally permissible with what the agent has the power to do. (MacIntyre, Short History, 11-12)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Brief comments to this post are welcome; however, please respect the civil tone of conversation that I wish to cultivate in this forum.