Atheism, Morality and Meaning

Book reviewed:
Michael Martin, Atheism, Morality and Meaning , 2002, Prometheus Books, 330pp, price £21.00 pb.     

Ending Life, Morality, and Meaning

Opponents of voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide often maintain that the procedures ought not to be accepted because ending an innocent human life would both be morally wrong in itself and have unfortunate consequences. A gravely suffering patient can grant that ending his life would involve such harm but still insist that he would have reason to continue living only if there were something to him in his abstaining from ending his life. Though relatively rarely, the notion of meaning of life has figured in recent medical ethical debate on voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. And in current philosophical discussion on meaning of life outside the medical ethical debate on voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide several authors have argued that being moral and having a meaningful existence are connected to each other. In this article, I assess whether his intentionally refraining from causing the harm related to voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide would involve something to such a patient in the sense that it would promote the meaningfulness of his life.     

疾病的意义与意义关怀

意义是人类关怀传达的基本要素和内容.意义关怀是医务人员在对患者及其家属现时疾病意义理解、认知的基础上,通过互动交流,形成共享意义的过程.理解意义是意义关怀的起点,疾病的意义包括现实意义和符号意义.意义关怀过程包括构建伙伴关系、有效的互动交流、形成共享意义三个阶段.     

"伦理"与"道德"概念的三重比较义

“伦理”与“道德”是伦理学或道德哲学中的两个核心概念,但二者长期处于概念模糊和逻辑混乱状态,导致伦理学和道德教育“名不正而言不顺”。通过对这两个概念进行以词源学为基础的三重比较:汉语言文化中的比较、英语文化中的比较、中西文化中的比较,我们可以得出的结论是:当代“伦理”概念蕴含着西方文化的理性、科学、公共意志等属性,“道德”概念蕴含着更多的东方文化的情性、人文、个人修养等色彩。“西学东渐”以来,中西“伦理”与“道德”概念经过碰撞、竞争和融合的过程,目前二者划界与范畴日益清晰,即“伦理”是伦理学中的一级概念,而“道德”是“伦理”概念下的二级概念。二者不能相互替代,它们有着各自的概念范畴和使用区域。     

The Meaning of Lives and the Meaning of Things

Meaning in life is an important aspect of human well-being and motivation. But as the notion of ‘meaning in life’ is not easily assimilated to that of semantic meaning, it is difficult to define. While meaning in life is standardly discussed in terms of meaningful ways of living, I here take the alternative approach of discussing the meaningfulness of things for agents. I claim that such meaningfulness, or significance, consists in the ways in which things invite agent-relevant responses. Meaningfulness in that sense is important for understanding, not just meaning in life for mature human beings, but also meaning for children, meaning in the arts, the continuity between ‘mere’ living and living meaningfully, and the connection between meaning in life and semantic meaning.     

The Morality of Nationalism

Book Information The Morality of Nationalism. Edited by R. McKim and J. McMahan. Oxford University Press. New York. 1997. Pp. xii + 371. Paperback, $42.95.     

The Biology of Morality

Abstract. The morality of human beings, defined here as our ability to determine whether our actions are right or wrong, depends not just on following rules but also on understanding the impact of our actions on another person. How we understand the impact of our actions on another person depends on our state of consciousness, which is mediated by our brain and nervous system. We describe how we understand our morality to flow naturally from the biological state we are living in and how we see our biology and our morality as mutually interactive. A change in one changes the other. Another way of saying this is that changing either our morality or our biology changes both—changes who we are and what we do.     

Authorization and The Morality of War

Why does it matter that those who fight wars be authorized by the communities on whose behalf they claim to fight? I argue that lacking authorization generates a moral cost, which counts against a war's proportionality, and that having authorization allows the transfer of reasons from the members of the community to those who fight, which makes the war more likely to be proportionate. If democratic states are better able than non-democratic states and sub-state groups to gain their community's authorization, this means that some wars will be proportionate if fought by democracies, disproportionate if not.     

The Use and Abuse of Morality

Both morality and theories of morality play many distinctive—and sometimes apparently conflicting—functions: they identify and prohibit wrongful aggression; they chart and analyze basic duties; they present ideals for emulation; they set the terms or justice, rights and entitlements; they characterize the norms of basic decency and neighborliness. Since many of these can, in practice, come into conflict with one another, morality provides guidance for integrating priorities. Claims to morality can, however, be misused as well as used: sanctimonious self-righteousness, self-centered moral narcisism and deflecting, misleading justification all present an abusive mask of morality. In this paper, I analyze both the use and abuse of morality and offer an account of its appropriate use, as presenting multiple heuristic questions for reflection.     

The Morality of Terrorism

In this paper (a sequel to ‘What Is Terrorism?’, Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 7 [ 1990]) I discuss both consequentialist and deontological justifications of terrorism. In the consequentialist context, I look in particular into Leon Trotsky’s classic defence of the ‘red terror’, based on the argument of continuity of war, revolution, and terrorism, and the claim that the distinction between the guilty and the innocent, combatants and noncombatants, is not relevant to modern warfare. On the deontological side, I discuss Virginia Held’s recent attempt at justifying terrorism in terms of basic human rights and distributive justice. The conclusion reached is that terrorism remains almost absolutely morally impermissible.     

The Morality of Daycare

An increasing number of parents are electing to use daycare to assist them with their parenting from infancy onward. Strikingly, there is scant discussion of whether or not such a practice is morally permissible. In this paper, I shall discuss three different arguments that I believe are implicitly thought to support the use of daycare. I shall argue that the current widespread use of daycare, particularly with respect to infant children, often involves arbitrarily subjugating the needs of children in favor of the desires of parents, and thus is often morally wrong. Finally, I consider a possible fourth argument; one that I believe stands a better chance of justifying the use of daycare, though in the final analysis I argue that it also fails to justify the current widespread use of daycare.     

The Morality of Feminism

Inaugural lecture as Professor of Women's Studies in the Social Science Faculty at the University of Utrecht.     

The Morality of Motorcycling

Abstract

Personal motor vehicle use is a common, yet dangerous, practice. While using a motor vehicle one poses himself and others to risk. If it is immoral to pose unnecessary risk to others, it is immoral to drive a car when an alternative is readily available. In this paper I claim that there is a morally better, readily available, alternative to driving a car alone: using a motorcycle. While this claim might sound dubious at first, I will show why it is sound and stands against all kinds of objections. I believe most people should switch from cars to motorcycles as their primary means of transportation, and governments should adopt policies to help people make this switch.