علیرضا ضمیری

One of the common criticisms of Kant's moral theory is the excessive attention to reason and its absoluteness in the moral law. In such a way that neglecting other elements involved in the moral judgment, including feelings, leads to the impossibility and emergence of the sadistic strain of Kant's moral foundations and provides a suitable ground for the emergence of evil. According to this view, evil is considered to be associated with good, because what is meant by moral good is an action that is in accordance with the absolute, regardless of its content. Aligned with the impossibility of the absolute, Sade moves Kant's moral foundations and considers the name of every absolute will to be evil according to the principle of non-contradiction. Therefore, any morally heinous act can be willed according to the moral law according to the inclusion in the maxim, without disturbing the foundations of the absolute. According to Lacan, loyalty to desire and its insatiability is a moral criterion that If morality is considered devoid of pathological elements, it will become its opposite, simple morality, and the morality of desire, instead of moving from one object to another object, will be caught in the bed of simple satisfaction, as a result, in the movement towards pleasure at the ultimate threshold. The truth remains. Kant uses the special concept of respect as a representative of the pathological element to avoid falling into the sadistic side of his ethics and to fix this gap for his ethics.

Philosophers have always looked for the relationship between motivation and moralobligation. For this purpose, Kant proposes a special feeling of respect and offersan interpretation of it that respect is defined as synonymous with morality; At thesame time, this feeling is not of the other feelings and therefore not experimental.Rather, it is similar to the concept of anxiety in Lacan's dissimilarity with empiricalfeeling. The feeling of respect appears when the subject finds himself near the object(the moral law). Besides, in explaining this concept and the object of the moral law,Kant uses expressions such as Voice and Eye, which have a pathological strain(depending on feeling). On the one hand, the voice and Eye direct the moral agent to the moral law, and on the other hand it prevents the unreasonableness and dominance of the superego over the moral law by separating the fat voice from the pure statement. The subject's Eye at the moral law and the Gaze of the moral law at the subject is the closest interpretation to the feeling of respect that shakes the body of every wrongdoer. This is a completely pathological interpretation of morality and a special sense of respect.

The divine command theory is one of the most well-known deontological ethics theories that has always numerous interpretations. The interpretations of the Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions of the command of God are according to the attributes that each religion has proved in its sacred texts and theological discussions. They consider the relationship between the moral and the divine as logical and necessary or as metaphysical and moral necessity. Explaining the relationship between the religious and moral command and the precedence of religion over morality requires various arrangements to finally justify a particular type of precedence historically, metaphysically, epistemologically, and conceptually or semantically. The divine command theory of Robert Adams is one of the modified examples of the theory of divine command in the contemporary period, which tries to reconstruct the weaknesses and shortcomings of the basic theories of divine command and justify the semantic precedence of religion over morality by relying on a metaphysical principle rooted in the particular conception of man's relationship with God. This approach has been formed according to the moral obligation and such concepts and has tried to defend the divine command theory by correcting semantic positions. From this point of view, in the obligation arising from wrong, an action is wrong only if it opposes the divine command or the divine will. The legitimacy of these commands also stems from the command of the God of love, which is a special relationship between the religious person and God.

The resolution of moral conflicts is the goal of any moral theory that puts an emphasis on the existence of absolute elements in moral judgments. Since deontological theories in ethics insist on the existence of absolute judgments and agent-independent obligations, they are concerned with the resolution of such conflicts more than any other theory. Various philosophical traditions, both continental and analytical, seek to solve the problem with their own methods. Maurice Mandelbaum, an American analytic philosopher, has devised and elaborated an independent ethical system from the viewpoint of moral phenomenological experience, taking the practical aim of his philosophy to be the resolution of moral conflicts. He takes the origins of such conflicts to be cognitive factors affecting the way a moral judgment is formed. Although such factors cannot always be overcome, we can consider certain principles that are phenomenologically helpful in many cases, although they are not absolute. In this point of view, principles that are helpful for the resolution of moral conflicts and disputes consist in the “principle of the priority of facts,” the “principle of universality,” and the “principle of teleology.” Given these principles, we seek to provide a criterion for the resolution for moral disagreements beyond any specific normative theory, justifying these principles given the beliefs and facts from which moral judgments inevitably arise. In this paper, we will briefly explain common solutions, especially in the deontological tradition, and then evaluate Mandelbaum’s solutions.