Ethics (Abelard)

Last updated
Ethics
Author Peter Abelard
CountryFrance
LanguageLatin
GenrePhilosophy
Publication date
c. 1138–1139

The Ethica (Ethics), also known as Scito te ipsum (Know Yourself), is a twelfth-century philosophical treatise by Peter Abelard. In it, Abelard argues that sin or "scorn for God" is fundamentally a matter of consent, not deeds.

Contents

Background and publication history

Abelard and other medieval philosophers wrestled with the problem of sin. The essential penitentials of Abelard's time implied that both thoughts and actions constituted sin, with the Decretum by Burchard of Worms going so far as to suggest that planning to commit wrongful acts was indistinguishable from performing them. [1] These penitentials, however, neglected to consider the role of one's intentions or motives. [2]

Abelard departs from these prevailing conceptions of sin in the Ethica, [1] [2] which he completed in 1138 [3] or 1139, [4] shortly after finishing a commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. The subtitle of the work, Scito te ipsum, [lower-alpha 1] was a "popular motto among monastic writers of the time". [6] Abelard's treatise was originally planned as a two-volume work, but he shelved the latter half (which would have revolved around what it means to live virtuously) after writing just one page. [7]

Most of the text's surviving copies were produced in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries; two of the earliest known manuscripts of the Ethica, dating to the twelfth century, are housed in the Bavarian State Library. [8]

Content

Abelard defines peccatum or sin as that which is worthy of God's damnation and must be repented of. [1] However, he also argues that the content of peccatum proprie (proper sin) is subjective: one is guilty of "scorn for God" if one does not do what one sincerely believes God requires one to do, even if one's beliefs are erroneous. [9] [10] Abelard locates proper sin in one's consensus (consent) to perform an action, [lower-alpha 2] [12] not the voluntas (desire or will) to do it and less so the actual operationem peccati or performance of the action. [13] He elaborates that "we consent to that which is not allowed when we do not at all draw back from carrying it out and are entirely ready to do it, if the chance is given." [11]

Voluntas is not a necessary precondition for sin, [14] since one can unwillingly consent to sin: "Sometimes we sin without any bad will at all." [15] He cites the hypothetical example of a servant who, in a state of duress, kills his "bloodthirsty master" in self-defence. [lower-alpha 3] Abelard maintains that the servant did not willingly consent to killing his master, although his consent arose from a certain will to live. [18] Accordingly, Abelard submits that willing to do something in order to achieve something else (for instance, "willing to kill to live") is fundamentally different from willing to do something (simply "willing to kill"), nor does the former imply the latter. [19] To avoid this confusion, Abelard subsequently proposes that what is said to be "willed", as in the case of the servant, should be more precisely described as "endured". [20]

Abelard then introduces the deontological [21] notion of quod non convenit, or "unfitting" deeds prohibited by God. [22] Recalling his earlier point that actual sin arises from knowingly consenting to what one merely believes to be unfitting, Abelard suggests that one could commit truly unfitting deeds without sinning, depending on one's intentio or reasons for consent. [22] He therefore concludes that, "properly speaking", infidels who sincerely believe themselves to be honouring God cannot be guilty of sin, even if their actions (and intentions) are, in fact, not good: "What contempt of God do they have in what they do for God and on account of which judge themselves to do well?" [23] Nevertheless, they are liable to divine punishment too, which is why Jesus cried out on the cross, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." [24]

It follows, in Abelard's telling, that divine moral precepts like the Ten Commandments fundamentally relate to one's consent of external actions, not the actions in and of themselves. [25] [26] [27] In practice, consent is apparently synonymous with irresistible temptation, [28] thus external actions are not within one's control, but consent is: "The less something is in our power, the less fitting it is to command it." [27] Moreover, Abelard submits that one's standing before God is fixed and cannot be altered "once an individual has consented to an act", even if it were possible to not perform it afterwards. [29] In Abelard's view, a sinner's reconciliation with God requires repentance, confession, and satisfaction through penance. [30]

Aftermath

Abelard himself anticipated criticism of his theory of sin: "There are those who are not a little upset when they hear us say that the act of sin adds nothing to guilt or damnation before God." [31] Indeed, in 1140, at the urging of Bernard of Clairvaux, the Council of Sens formally condemned Abelard for suggesting that actions in themselves were "morally indifferent". [4] [32] However, the ideas of the Ethica were echoed in many subsequent medieval treatises, including those of Richard of Saint Victor and Thomas Aquinas. [4] [33]

Notes

  1. ↑ According to Willemien Otten, "In the context of twelfth-century thought, this Socratic motto might be described as 'know yourself,' with a more autobiographical appeal, or alternatively as 'one does well to know oneself,' in a more generic, anthropological sense." [5]
  2. ↑ The term consensus was frequently employed in writings that predated the Ethica, but not in the sense of "consent to perform an action". [11]
  3. ↑ This example is borrowed from Augustine of Hippo's De libero arbitrio . [16] [17]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">G. E. Moore</span> English philosopher, 1873–1958

George Edward Moore was an English philosopher, who with Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein and earlier Gottlob Frege was among the initiators of analytic philosophy. He and Russell began deemphasizing the idealism which was then prevalent among British philosophers and became known for advocating common-sense concepts and contributing to ethics, epistemology and metaphysics. He was said to have an "exceptional personality and moral character". Ray Monk later dubbed him "the most revered philosopher of his era".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Original sin</span> Christian doctrine about human nature

Original sin is the Christian doctrine that holds that humans, through the fact of birth, inherit a tainted nature with a proclivity to sinful conduct in need of regeneration. The biblical basis for the belief is generally found in Genesis 3, in a line in Psalm 51:5, and in Paul's Epistle to the Romans, 5:12-21.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sin</span> Transgression against divine law

In a religious context, sin is a transgression against divine law or a law of the deities. Each culture has its own interpretation of what it means to commit a sin. While sins are generally considered actions, any thought, word, or act considered immoral, selfish, shameful, harmful, or alienating might be termed "sinful".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Virtue</span> Positive trait or quality deemed to be morally good

A virtue is a trait of excellence, including traits that may be moral, social, or intellectual. The cultivation and refinement of virtue is held to be the "good of humanity" and thus is valued as an end purpose of life or a foundational principle of being. In human practical ethics, a virtue is a disposition to choose actions that succeed in showing high moral standards: doing what is right and avoiding what is wrong in a given field of endeavour, even when doing so may be unnecessary from a utilitarian perspective. When someone takes pleasure in doing what is right, even when it is difficult or initially unpleasant, they can establish virtue as a habit. Such a person is said to be virtuous through having cultivated such a disposition. The opposite of virtue is vice, and the vicious person takes pleasure in habitual wrong-doing to their detriment.

Repentance is reviewing one's actions and feeling contrition or regret for past wrongs, which is accompanied by commitment to and actual actions that show and prove a change for the better.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mortal sin</span> Sinful act which can lead to damnation

A mortal sin, in Christian theology, is a gravely sinful act which can lead to damnation if a person does not repent of the sin before death. It is alternatively called deadly, grave, and serious; the concept of mortal sin is found in both Catholicism and Lutheranism. A sin is considered to be "mortal" when its quality is such that it leads to a separation of that person from God's saving grace. Three conditions must together be met for a sin to be mortal: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent." The sin against the Holy Spirit and the sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance are considered especially serious. This type of sin is distinguished from a venial sin in that the latter simply leads to a weakening of a person's relationship with God. Despite its gravity, a person can repent of having committed a mortal sin. Such repentance is the primary requisite for forgiveness and absolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Euthyphro dilemma</span> Ethical problem on the origin of morality posed by Socrates

The Euthyphro dilemma is found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks Euthyphro, "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" (10a)

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gilbert de la Porrée</span> French theologian, 1085–1154

Gilbert de la Porrée, also known as Gilbert of Poitiers, Gilbertus Porretanus or Pictaviensis, was a scholastic logician and theologian and Bishop of Poitiers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Héloïse</span> 12th-century French nun, philosopher and writer

Héloïse, variously Héloïse d'Argenteuil or Héloïse du Paraclet, was a French nun, philosopher, writer, scholar, and abbess.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hastings Rashdall</span> British philosopher, theologian, historian and Anglican priest (1858-1924)

Hastings Rashdall was an English philosopher, theologian, historian, and Anglican priest. He expounded a theory known as ideal utilitarianism, and he was a major historian of the universities of the Middle Ages.

Tawba is the Islamic concept of repenting to God due to performing any sins and misdeeds. It is a direct matter between a person and God, so there is no intercession. There is no original sin in Islam. It is the act of leaving what God has prohibited and returning to what he has commanded. The word denotes the act of being repentant for one's misdeeds, atoning for those misdeeds, and having a strong determination to forsake those misdeeds. If someone sins against another person, restitution is required.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Works of mercy</span> Meritorious works or acts in morals

Works of mercy are practices considered meritorious in Christian ethics.

<i>Principia Ethica</i> 1903 book by G. E. Moore

Principia Ethica is a book written in 1903 by British philosopher, G. E. Moore. Moore questions a fundamental pillar of ethics, specifically what the definition of "good" is. He concludes that "good" is indefinable because any attempts to do so commit the naturalistic fallacy. Principia Ethica was influential, with Moore's arguments being considered ground-breaking advances in the field of moral philosophy.

Free will in theology is an important part of the debate on free will in general. Religions vary greatly in their response to the standard argument against free will and thus might appeal to any number of responses to the paradox of free will, the claim that omniscience and free will are incompatible.

Qadar is the concept of divine destiny in Islam. As God is all-knowing and all-powerful, everything that has happened and will happen in the universe is already known. At the same time, human beings are responsible for their actions, and will be rewarded or punished accordingly on Judgement Day.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Christian views on sin</span> Viewpoints of sin according to the Bible

In Christianity, sin is an immoral act and transgression of divine law. The doctrine of sin is central to the Christian faith, since its basic message is about redemption in Christ.

Sin is an important concept in Islamic ethics that Muslims view as being anything that goes against the commands of God or breaching the laws and norms laid down by religion. Islam teaches that sin is an act and not a state of being. It is believed that God weighs an individual's good deeds against their sins on the Day of Judgement and punishes those individuals whose evil deeds outweigh their good deeds.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peter Abelard</span> French philosopher, logician and theologian (c. 1079–1142)

Peter Abelard was a medieval French scholastic philosopher, leading logician, theologian, poet, composer and musician.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Augustinianism</span> Philosophical and theological system

Augustinianism is the philosophical and theological system of Augustine of Hippo and its subsequent development by other thinkers, notably Boethius, Anselm of Canterbury and Bonaventure. Among Augustine's most important works are The City of God, De doctrina Christiana, and Confessions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Christian views on lying</span> Christian views on lying

Lying is strongly discouraged and forbidden by most interpretations of Christianity. Arguments for this are based on various biblical passages, especially "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour", one of the Ten Commandments. Christian theologians disagree as to the exact definition of "lie" and whether it is ever acceptable.

References

Citations

  1. 1 2 3 Decosimo 2018, p. 32.
  2. 1 2 Porter 2000, p. 370.
  3. ↑ Holopainen 2014, p. 213.
  4. 1 2 3 Bejczy 2003, p. 2.
  5. ↑ Otten 2005, p. 58.
  6. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 374.
  7. ↑ Mann 2016, p. 151.
  8. ↑ Luscombe 1965, pp. 118–121.
  9. ↑ Mann 2016, p. 162.
  10. ↑ Decosimo 2018, pp. 32–33.
  11. 1 2 Marenbon 1997, p. 260.
  12. ↑ Holopainen 2014, p. 215.
  13. ↑ Decosimo 2018, pp. 33–34.
  14. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 373.
  15. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 35.
  16. ↑ Mann 2016, p. 154.
  17. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 383.
  18. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 37.
  19. ↑ Decosimo 2018, pp. 37–38.
  20. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 39.
  21. ↑ Holopainen 2014, p. 227.
  22. 1 2 Decosimo 2018, p. 48.
  23. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 50.
  24. ↑ Mann 2016, p. 163.
  25. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 41.
  26. ↑ Holopainen 2014, p. 220.
  27. 1 2 Porter 2000, p. 380.
  28. ↑ Decosimo 2018, p. 46.
  29. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 372.
  30. ↑ Otten 2005, p. 63.
  31. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 390.
  32. ↑ Marenbon 1997, p. 256.
  33. ↑ Porter 2000, p. 388.

Works cited

  • Bejczy, István (2003). "Deeds Without Value: Exposing a Weak Spot in Abelard's Ethics". Recherches de théologie et philosophie médiévales. 70 (1): 1–21. doi:10.2143/RTPM.70.1.978. JSTOR   26170108.
  • Decosimo, David (2018). "Sin, Consent, and Apparent Confusion in Abelard's Ethica". The Journal of Religion. 98 (1): 29–58. doi:10.1086/694691. S2CID   171665321.
  • Holopainen, Taina M. (2014). "Intentions and Conscious Moral Choices in Peter Abelard's Know Yourself". Rethinking Abelard: A Collection of Critical Essays. Brill. pp. 213–229. ISBN   9789004262713.
  • Luscombe, D.E. (1965). "Towards a new edition of Peter Abelard's Ethica or Scito te ipsum: An introduction to the manuscripts". Vivarium. 3 (1): 115–127. doi:10.1163/156853465X00061.
  • Mann, William E. (2016). God, Belief, and Perplexity. Oxford University Press. ISBN   9780190459222.
  • Marenbon, John (1997). The Philosophy of Peter Abelard. Cambridge University Press. ISBN   9780511582714.
  • Otten, Willemien (2005). "In Conscience's Court: Abelard's Ethics as a Science of the Self". Virtue and Ethics in the Twelfth Century. Brill. pp. 53–74. ISBN   9789004143272.
  • Porter, Jean (2000). "Responsibility, Passion, and Sin: A Reassessment of Abelard's Ethics". Journal of Religious Ethics. 28 (3): 367–394. doi:10.1111/0384-9694.00054.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.