more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
The ethics of duty cannot be sustained independently of a religious framework.
Gist of Idea
The ethics of duty requires a religious framework
Source
Richard Taylor (Virtue Ethics: an Introduction [2002], Ch.2)
Book Ref
Taylor,Richard: 'Virtue Ethics: an Introduction' [Prometheus 2002], p.7
A Reaction
This is a big challenge to Kant, echoing Nietzsche's jibe that Kant just wanted to be 'obedient'. The only options are either 'natural duties', or 'duties of reason'. Reason may have a pull (like pleasure), but a 'duty'? Difficult.
| 5076 | To Greeks it seemed obvious that the virtue of anything is the perfection of its function [Taylor,R] |
| 5077 | The modern idea of obligation seems to have lost the idea of an obligation 'to' something [Taylor,R] |
| 5078 | Kant and Mill both try to explain right and wrong, without a divine lawgiver [Taylor,R] |
| 5079 | Pleasure can have a location, and be momentary, and come and go - but happiness can't [Taylor,R] |
| 5067 | Morality based on 'forbid', 'permit' and 'require' implies someone who does these things [Taylor,R] |
| 5066 | If we are made in God's image, pursuit of excellence is replaced by duty to obey God [Taylor,R] |
| 5065 | The ethics of duty requires a religious framework [Taylor,R] |
| 5068 | 'Eudaimonia' means 'having a good demon', implying supreme good fortune [Taylor,R] |