پژوهش نامه اخلاق
پیاپی 1 (پاییز 1387)

In this paper, the present writer tries to identify virtue ethics, and evaluate its relation to Islamic ethics. Virtue ethics, as a new current in moral philosophy, instead of emphasizing on moral “action”, focuses on moral “character” of the agent and by this approach, differs from two dominant systems in normative ethics, i.e. Consequentialism, and Utilitarianism. Virtue ethics is very familiar to some Muslim ethicists and they try to formulate Islamic ethics upon four famous Cardinal virtues: courage, moderation, wisdom, and justice. But the writer believes that this identification is false, and by tracing the roots of virtue ethics in works of Greek thinkers such as Plato, and Aristotle, and by analyzing the Greek word Arête, virtue, comes to the conclusion that Islamic ethics and its virtues are very distinct from Greek Virtue ethics, and we should not confuse them with each other.

In this paper a general survey of modern ethics is presented with attention to its relevance for religious ethics. The survey takes account of the importance of Montaigne, Hobbes, Hume, Kant, and Hegel for the shift in Western ethics away from religion. It is argued that a study of this process of the secularization of ethics must be understood thoroughly by anyone who hope to have success in offering a religious ethics in the contemporary world. Several more recent trends are also mentioned and contemporary ethical theories are divided into three general types: consequentialist, deontological, and virtue based. It is argued that a successful religious ethics needs to take into account the strengths of all three of these approaches.

Different approaches have been taken to prove secularism among which are those of sociological, psychological and political. Even some have tried to base it upon religious teachings and some other, criticizing aforementioned approaches, have also sought to base it on philosophy. Adel Zaher, an outstanding deputy of the last approach, has known ethics independent of religion, the religion based on reason and the reason prior to narration. For him, these can be counted among the reasons for secularism. In this paper the first, namely the independence of ethics from religion, has been studied. The nature of secularism, its relation to religion, various secular tendencies and its historical development have been described in first part of the paper. In the second, it has been shown that how this independency has led to secularism and then the claim has been studied in the fields of definitions, logical justification of the statements and their discovery. Meanwhile, the possibility or necessity of practical statements in general and ethical ones in particular has been studied. Furthermore, Adel Zaher and Hume’s view on which ought to cannot be inducted from is has been argued against and so has been the theory of Divine command given to prove dependency of ethics on religion and finally the correct view has been introduced.

Kant’s ethics, philosophy and religious thought have been of comprehensive authority in the world. This was the effect left by Kant’s essential critique of weakened philosophy of his time, the fact of which the currency of enlightenment was influenced. Proving incapability of theoretical reason in the field of metaphysics, turned his attention to practical reason. In the epistemological view of Kant, the power of reasoning was known to be of no authority in ethics, religion and metaphysics. The fields, therefore, were founded on practical reason. Ethics or practical reason is argued for as a consequence by theoretical reason. Since for Kant, in practical reason the effectiveness or agency of reason in doing ethical actions has been intended, the fact in which theoretical understanding is not intended. He tries to establish the effectiveness and objectiveness of ethical principles in man himself. In this way, even good will, being absolute good, would be meaningful only so far as it can be understood by man. As a result, one can say that though man can never arrive at metaphysical understanding by the power of theoretical reason, he is equipped with such a ability that he can establish the very fundamental ethical principles. Man’s theoretical self-establishment and subjectivism, in spite of the limitations of theoretical reason, causes humanistic state of ethics and religion, their dependence on man, being essentially limited, and their relativity. And here can we find an instability in religion and man’s morality. Given such the reality, one can never exaltation toward God. This paper, explaining the important foundations of Kantian ethics, has studied the quality of its being religious and the strength and weaknesses of its consequences.

Virtual ethics is regarded as a normative theory. Virtual ethics focuses on virtue and it, therefore, is distinctive from utilitarianism and functionalism. Can this ethical school be religiously interpreted? Answering the question, different views have been presented. MostMuslims and Christian philosophers, giving a philosophico-religious justification on virtue, have answered it positively. Some, however, basing their explanation on certainproofs, have hesitated on the problem.The author, justifying two mentioned approaches, has argued for a kind of agreement between virtual ethics and religion. Finally rectifying or changing the framework of virtual ethics has been counted among the proposals preparing the foundations for proving the agreement. In the paper, Islam and Christianity, two divine religions, have been brought into consideration.

We theists believe in one God from whom all things depend. We are confronted with the question of how morality could depend on God. Let us call theories of morality in which God plays a substantive role supernatural ethical theories. In this paper I am going to present and assess several possible answers to the question of how morality could depend on God.

When finding the origin for decency and indecency of man’s optional actions, there can be seen two well-known theories called revealed decency and indecency of action (R.D.I.A) and essential decency and indecency of action (E.D.I.A), each having its own partials in Christian and Islamic world. One strong objection against the latter appear as: how can the action of Abraham toward his son be ethically justified? This question can never be answered according to E.D.I.A. Soren Kierkegaard in his Fear and Trembling has proposed the problem and psychologically analyzing the character of Abraham and his son, tried to justify their pure commitment before God. Speaking of different levels on which people live out their lives: the aesthetic, the ethical, and the religious and putting them in the third, Kierkegaard has justified their pure commitment before God.