ORIGINAL RESEARCH

 

Moraliteit, die opdringerige en die voorwaardelike

 

Morality, the obtrusive and the conditional

 

 

M.F. Heyns

Skool vir Filosofie, Potchefstroomkampus, Noordwes-Universiteit, POTCHEFSTROOM. E-pos: michael.heyns@nwu.ac.za

 

 

---

OPSOMMING

Die sekularistiese (immanentistiese), historistiese en pluralistiese aard van huidige denke bemoeilik die artikulering van transendentale voorwaardes virmoraliteit. Oënskynlik is dit veral die konstantheid van 'n struktuur vir moraliteit wat as transendentale voorwaarde vir moraliteit in die spervuur is. Maar 'n aggressiewe immanentisme wat veroorsaak dat 'n transendente oorsprong vir moraliteit glad nie eers op die agenda van laat-moderne denkers mag verskyn nie, is waarskynlik net so 'n akute uitsluit van transendentale oorwegings. In hierdie artikel word gewys op die (soms onbewustelike) ervaring van sommige filosowe dat 'n konstante struktuur vir moraliteit ditself wel aan ons opdring. 'n Verdere aanspraak is dat 'n soortgelyke opdringerigheid bemerk kan word ten opsigte van 'n samehangende verskeidenheid morele bronne (d.w.s. bronne wat hulle transendentaal t.o.v. mekaar bevind). Die "gewaagdste" argument is vir 'n transendentale transendente oorsprong vir moraliteit.

Kernbegrippe: modern/postmodern/laat-modern moraliteit/etiek opdringerige transendente/gegewe universele/konstante voorwaardelike/transendentale

---

ABSTRACT

The secularist (immanentist), historicist and pluralistic nature of current thinking disables the articulation of transcendental conditions for morality. It is ostensibly especially the constancy of a structure for morality, as transcendental condition, for morality that is disputable. However, an aggressive immanen-tism sees to it that a transcendent origin for morality does not even appear on the agenda of late modern thinkers, which makes the latter probably an equally serious marginalisation of transcendental considerations. In this article the (sometimes unconscious) experience of some philosophers that a constant structure for morality obtrudes itself upon us, is highlighted. A further claim is that a similar obtrusion can be observed about a coherent diversity of moral sources (i.e. sources which find themselves in a transcendental position with regard to each other). The "most daring" argument is for a transcendental transcendent origin for morality.

Key concepts: conditional/transcendental modern/postmodern/late modern morality/ethics optrusive transcendent/given universal/constant

---

 

 

Full text available only in PDF format.

 

 

Geraadpleegde bronne

ADENEY, F.S. 1991. Review of Sources of the self. Theology today, 48:204-210.         [ Links ]

BAUMAN, Z. 1994. Postmodern ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.         [ Links ]

BAUMAN, Z. 1995. Life in fragments: essays in postmodern morality. Oxford: Blackwell.         [ Links ]

DAWKINS, R. 2007. The God delusion. London: Black Swan.         [ Links ]

DE WACHTER, F. 1990. Ethiek: modern en postmodern. Tijdschrift voor filosofie, 52(2):207-229.         [ Links ]

FLANAGAN, O. 1990. Identity and strong and weak evaluation. (In Flanagan, O. & Oksenberg Rorty, A., eds. Identity, character, and morality: essays in moral psychology. Cambridge: MIT. p. 37-65.         [ Links ])

FUMERTON, R. 2005. Foundationalist theories of epistemic justification. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justep-foundational/ Date of access: 13 Okt. 2006.         [ Links ]

GASCOIGNE, N. 2008. Richard Rorty: liberalism, irony and the ends of philosophy. Cambridge: Polity.         [ Links ]

HABERMAS, J. 1993. Justification and application: remarks on discourse ethics. Cambridge: MIT.         [ Links ]

JAMES, S. 1995. Internal and external in the work of Descartes. (In Tully, J. & Weinstock, D.M., eds. Philosophy in an age of pluralism: the philosophy of Charles Taylor in question. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 7-19.         [ Links ])

KLAPWIJK, J. 1995. Ethisch pluralisme en de opdringerigheid van het universele. (In De Boer, T. & Griffioen, S., eds. Pluralisme: cultuurfilosofische beschouwingen. Amsterdam: Boom. p. 180-203.         [ Links ])

KOLAKOWSKI, L. 1988. Metaphysical horror. Oxford: Blackwell.         [ Links ]

KUKLA, A. 2000. Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. London: Routledge.         [ Links ]

LARMORE, C. 1991. Review of Sources of the self. Ethics, 102(1)158-162.         [ Links ]

LÖW-BEER, M. 1991. Living a life and the problem of existential impossibility. Inquiry, 34(2):217-236.         [ Links ]

MULHALL, S. & SWIFT, A. 1993. Liberals and communitarians. Oxford: Blackwell.         [ Links ]

POIRIER, M.W. 1993. Reassessing the modern era. Modern age, 35:215-223.         [ Links ]

RORTY, R. 1991. Objectivity, relativism, and truth: philosophical papers. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

RORTY, R. 1993. Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

RORTY, R. 1999. Philosophy and social hope. London: Penguin.         [ Links ]

ROSEN, M. 1991. Must we return to moral realism? Inquiry, 34(2):183-194.         [ Links ]

SCHNEEWIND, J.B. 1991. Review of Sources of the self. The journal of philosophy, 88:422-426.         [ Links ]

SCHWEIKER, W. 1992. The good and moral identity: a theological ethical response to Charles Taylor's Sources of the self. Journal of religion, 72:560-572.         [ Links ]

SKINNER, Q. 1991. Who are "we"? Ambiguities of the modern self. Inquiry, 34(2):133-153.         [ Links ]

SKINNER, Q. 1995. Modernity and disenchantment: some historical reflections. (In Tully, J. & Weinstock, D.M., eds. Philosophy in an age of pluralism: the philosophy of Charles Taylor in question. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 37-48.         [ Links ])

TAYLOR, C. 1985a. Philosophical papers. Vol. 1: Human agency and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 1985b. Philosophical Papers. Vol. 2: Philosophy and the human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 1989. Sources of the self: the making of the modern identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 1991a. The malaise of modernity. Concord: Anansi.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 1991b. Comments and replies. Inquiry, 34:237-254.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 1995. Philosophical arguments. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.         [ Links ]

TAYLOR, C. 2007. A secular age. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.         [ Links ]

WALDRON, J. 1990. How we learn to be good. The Times literary supplement: 325-326, 23-29 March.         [ Links ]

WESSELS, F. 2006. Wie was Jesus regtig? Oor die historiese Jesus. Wellington: Lux Verbi.BM.         [ Links ]

WOLFE, A. 1990. Review of Sources of the self. Contemporary sociology, 19(4):627-628.         [ Links ]

WOLTERS, A.M. 1995. Creation order: a historical look at our heritage. (In Walsh, B.J., Hart, H. & VanderVennen, R.E., eds. An ethos of compassion and the integrity of creation. Lanham: University Press of America. p. 33-48.         [ Links ])

WOLTERSTORFF, N. 1979. Reason within the bounds of religion. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.         [ Links ]