|
Actually, Stephen, the difference between the laws of kashruth (kosher laws) and injunctions against murder or theft is not obscure. Additionally, among more advanced peoples, such as the Greeks and Jews, there were rules of hospitality that embraced the stranger, and the first systematic attempts at ethical universalization. The Greeks, though, noted that one cannot have a comprehensive ethical doctrine without some notion of the ends of man, and that those are subject to dispute. For the Stoics, it was life in conformity with Nature, and the achievement of apathy, that is, an indifference to fortune. For the Epicureans, it was the limitation of pain, and therefore the pursuit of moderate pleasures. For Plato and Aristotle, the highest calling is that of philosophical contemplation, and the increasing comprehension of the cosmic order, and the mass of humanity sustains the social order that permits such pursuits among the elite, and shares in their calling to a limited degree. If the ends are disputable, the ethical consequences are, as well. If you are right, and survival is the only "imperative", than expediency is all that is left. If, on the other hand, the end of man is to exalt his dignity as the image of God, then the emphasis will be on respect and mutual aid....... |
