The Strib and the New York Times reported, in a two day period, alarming declines in common birds, hunters and anglers, and arts critics. We have already heard about an alarming decrease in bees. A letter to the editor lamented the loss of all of the most seasoned human interest, general topic columnists at the Strib. Some of these declines have clear explanations. Others are puzzling to everybody.
As I hear such news, from different directions, I think of a line from chapter 46 of the Tao Te Ching: "When the Way rules the world, coach horses fertilize the fields; when the Way does not rule, war horses breed in the parks." (Blackney translation)
There's a tradition in ethics about finding and articulating a Way through life. The capital letters scare off contemporary philosophers, who focus in on smaller stretches of moral territory: what should we do about abortion, genetic engineering, the global economy. But there is this other tradition, which somehow promises to minimize unintended consequences, to be right in all directions, now and forever.
This isn't something we want to discard frivolously. We can land ourselves in deep misery by a string of individual decisions each of which makes some sense, taken by itself. We need information about how to get beyond that piece-by-piece ethics.
Posted by shea0017 at June 20, 2007 10:16 AMThese last two paragraphs go to the heart of the problem: ethics reacts to the increasing complexity of the world in much the same manner as do other domains.
In medicine, the increasing complexity has spawned medicine-by-subspecialty. In theory, this is fine; in fact, the patient usually suffers due to inadequate communication (and creeping medical de-professionalization. Yet, the over-arching moral directive still remains at least, in sight. Stated best by the Mayo Clinic: "The needs of the patient come first."
To get beyond "piece-by-piece ethics" requires a moral framework with a comprehensive breadth, depth, and authority. (Fortunately or unfortunately) the only candidate I know of is the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Posted by: Joe at June 22, 2007 12:01 PMThese last two paragraphs go to the heart of the problem: ethics reacts to the increasing complexity of the world in much the same manner as do other domains.
In medicine, the increasing complexity has spawned medicine-by-subspecialty. In theory, this is fine; in fact, the patient usually suffers due to inadequate communication (and creeping medical de-professionalization. Yet, the over-arching moral directive still remains at least, in sight. Stated best by the Mayo Clinic: "The needs of the patient come first."
To get beyond "piece-by-piece ethics" requires a moral framework with a comprehensive breadth, depth, and authority. (Fortunately or unfortunately) the only candidate I know of is the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Posted by: Joe at June 22, 2007 12:01 PMThe Magisterium of the Catholic Church? Yeah, things just havn't been the same since most folks learned how to read, you know?
Posted by: Ron at November 17, 2007 7:18 PM