Thursday, September 3, 2015
The Definition of Morality
In Chapter 6 of the Republic Socrates defines morality in terms of the proper functioning of the mind. He states that "[i]ts sphere is a person's inner activity; it is really a matter of oneself and the parts of oneself"(443d). A person is moral if and only if the parts of her mind work together and the rational part guides and directs the other parts. Given such a definition, Socrates proceeds to show that such a mind is healthy and a disordered mind leads to unhappiness. Yet is Socrates' definition of morality correct? Is that definition close to your working definition of morality? If he fails, where or how does he fail? Is the connection between morality and mental health as tight as Socrates argues?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Even though Socrates’ definition of morality seems to be correct and at first glance it is totally fine, if one were to take a closer look at his definition they would find flaws and failures. If Socrates’ definition were perfect, it wouldn’t be philosophical not to try to disprove it and we would be disrespecting Socrates by not trying to do so. His definition of morality is flawed because he does not take into account mental illness or social ignorance in people such as serial killers. Serial killers’ “rationalize every aspect and detail of their behavior so there is no reason in their head as to why they should stop.” In their minds, serial killers actions and killings are seen to be rational and since it is seen as such the rest of their mind follows the leader, rationality, therefore making killing moral. This may seem backwards, (How can killing someone be moral?) that is because their actions are seen to be immoral relative to your personal rationality. Much like speed in physics, morality is relative; killing people is moral relative to the serial killers mind but immoral relative to yours, mine, and many other people on earth. In conclusion, Socrates’ definition for morality is correct only if we live in a world with sane people, a world we unfortunately do not live in. If he were to change his definition slightly to say that morality is when the rational part of a sane person’s mind is the only voice for a person’s decisions.
ReplyDelete"What Motivates Serial Killers To Kill | Twisted Minds - a Website about Serial Killers." Twisted Minds a Website about Serial Killers RSS. 2007. Accessed September 3, 2015.
While morality, as Socrates defines it, does have many aspects related to one’s mental state and the ability of the parts of the mind to work together, this definition misses a key part to the true meaning of morality. Morality involves people and the situation they are in. For instance, in the case of the television show, Dexter is a serial killer who murders other serial killers. While his rational mind could reason that he is saving the lives of innocent people by murdering other serial killers, in the end this act is not moral, right or just. Socrates’ conclusion that his definition of morality will lead to a more rewarding and happier life could be true. In the case of Dexter, after murdering serial killers he may feel satisfied even though his act was immoral. Lastly, the inclusion of wisdom in Socrates’ definition could make it valid, especially when it comes to the rational part of the mind. If one were to always take the wise action and be guided by one’s rational mind, it would be moral. Specifically, in the case of Dexter, it would not be wise to kill those men because the risk of being caught and living an unrewarding life is very high. Therefore, it would not be wise and thus moral to find another action to solve this problem. Regardless, the action that is in the end regarded as moral or not should still have its own definition to clarify in which situations Socrates’ definition would be true.
ReplyDelete