The Conscience: A Force for Good?

[Strivax]

So, I'm wondering what part the idea of the conscience plays in your world view?

Is it the sole and sovereign determination of what is right? Is it subject to distortion by an inevitably sinful nature? Should the pursuit of the dictates of one's conscience, after the right to life, be the most essential of human rights? Should we be suspicious of consciences, being as how they may be the product of a partial (ie biased and incomplete) understanding of the universe?

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

So, I'm wondering what part the idea of the conscience plays in your world view?

Is it the sole and sovereign determination of what is right? Is it subject to distortion by an inevitably sinful nature? Should the pursuit of the dictates of one's conscience, after the right to life, be the most essential of human rights? Should we be suspicious of consciences, being as how they are the product of a partial (ie biased and incomplete) understanding of the universe?

Best wishes, Strivax.

The Bible is our authority, and when things get less clear indeed our conscience is helpful and important. And yes, the conscience can also be clouded by our sinful desires and distorted, but when it comes to things less defined in the Scriptures it does become important, though we should nurture our consciences by reading the Scriptures so that we don't use the conscience as an excuse to justify our own selfish desires.

 

[JackRT]

So, I'm wondering what part the idea of the conscience plays in your world view?

Is it the sole and sovereign determination of what is right? Is it subject to distortion by an inevitably sinful nature? Should the pursuit of the dictates of one's conscience, after the right to life, be the most essential of human rights? Should we be suspicious of consciences, being as how they are the product of a partial (ie biased and incomplete) understanding of the universe?

Best wishes, Strivax.

These are very good questions. I have difficulty in regarding the conscience as being a completely objective determinant of right and wrong because it depends very much upon how that conscience is formed. I am speaking here of parental, societal and religious influences. One might even include political influences. One should strive to follow the dictates of one's conscience but one also has the responsibility to examine one's conscience thoroughly and modify one's thinking and behaviour if we find it wanting.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Is it the sole and sovereign determination of what is right?

No, but it is a large part of what you have to work with. Do you toss Jews into the gas chambers? Your conscience may hopefully be able to get you to think twice about that.

Is it subject to distortion by an inevitably sinful nature?

No, since there is no such thing as a "sinful nature", but one's conscience can be distorted by false ideas. I don't doubt that some of the people in charge of concentration camps believe fully in their cause.

Should the pursuit of the dictates of one's conscience, after the right to life, be the most essential of human rights?

I don't think that I would phrase it in quite that way, but something like that may be correct. Individual liberty is the human right of being able to live a rationally self-directed life, and conscience is a part of that.

Should we be suspicious of consciences, being as how they are the product of a partial (ie biased and incomplete) understanding of the universe?

In the same way we should question just about anything.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Strivax]

The Bible is our authority, and when things get less clear indeed our conscience is helpful and important. And yes, the conscience can also be clouded by our sinful desires and distorted, but when it comes to things less defined in the Scriptures it does become important, though we should nurture our consciences by reading the Scriptures so that we don't use the conscience as an excuse to justify our own selfish desires.

Uh huh. So it seems, Sultan Of Swing, that you put scripture before conscience in respect of the moral calculus you apply to the ethical dilemmas presented us by the world. But what tells you it should be this way, if it is not your conscience?

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[JackRT]

In the same way we should question just about anything.

Skepticism is a highly under rated virtue.

 

[Strivax]

These are very good questions. I have difficulty in regarding the conscience as being a completely objective determinant of right and wrong because it depends very much upon how that conscience is formed. I am speaking here of parental, societal and religious influences. One might even include political influences. One should strive to follow the dictates of one's conscience but one also has the responsibility to examine one's conscience thoroughly and modify one's thinking and behaviour if we find it wanting.

So, for you, JackRT, conscience should be overridden if rational examination finds it flawed? Have I got that right?

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Tull]

Uh huh. So it seems, Sultan Of Swing, that you put scripture before conscience

Yeah,Christians do that because God has the final word on right and wrong.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Conscience (especially when we're young) is sort of an instinctual reaction to moral situations. As we grow and learn, our conscience may tell us different things. Was it right before? Is it right now? Will it be more right in the future? Clearly, it is not infallible, but it's a starting place for learning and growing.

 

[Strivax]

No, but it is a large part of what you have to work with. Do you toss Jews into the gas chambers? Your conscience may hopefully be able to get you to think twice about that.

Hmmm. There is a story about Himmler, the head of the SS during fascist ascendency in Europe. Apparently, in the early stages of the war, he was taken to an execution site where Jews first dug pits, and then lined up and were shot to conveniently fall into them. Apparently, he was physically sick, on confrontation with this reality. And so began the search for a humane way of ending Jewish lives. And this method, meant to be humane not for the Jews, but for their Nazi executioners, culminated in the production of the gas Zyklon B, and it's deployment into the death camps such as Auschwitz and Majdenek.

I can't help thinking that the conscience element was Himmler's physical retching, and the rational element was the reaction to it that produced the poisonous gas.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[com7fy8]

there is no such thing as a "sinful nature"

I think there is such a thing as a . . . selfish nature.

but one's conscience can be distorted by false ideas.

But our character can effect which ideas we accept and which we don't . . . plus can decide how we are willing to interpret the Bible.

I don't doubt that some of the people in charge of concentration camps believe fully in their cause.

Our Apostle Paul says there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (in Ephesians 2:2) < this spirit of Satan can share with humans so we actually think what he has us thinking, plus Satanic emotions and drives can work very hard. Satanic drives tend to be dominating and dictatorial, wasting us to seek for pleasure and control and using people . . . not regarding however our consciences might have been taught.

Therefore, each person needs how God delivers us "from the power of Satan to God" > please consider Acts 26:18.

Skepticism is a highly under rated virtue.

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

To me, this includes how we need to pray and test with God so we get better than what our own consciences can give us.

And we do not test only for what is right or wrong, but test for how God is able to use any thing or situation for His love purpose, while we do the part which God has us doing while He does what we never could choose, in our own limited consciences, and produce, ourselves

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Is it the sole and sovereign determination of what is right?

No.

Is it subject to distortion by an inevitably sinful nature?

Yes.

Should the pursuit of the dictates of one's conscience, after the right to life, be the most essential of human rights?

God, no.

Should we be suspicious of consciences, being as how they may be the product of a partial (ie biased and incomplete) understanding of the universe?

Well, yeah...

The Christian concept of conscience, an "inner voice" pointing people the right way, is not something universal to everybody, but something that develops with spiritual maturity.

 

[Strivax]

Yeah,Christians do that because God has the final word on right and wrong.

Of course He does. The issue is, how does He communicate that to us? And what tells us what is His communication, if it is not our conscience?

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I can't help thinking that the conscience element was Himmler's physical retching, and the rational element was the reaction to it that produced the poisonous gas.

Are you suggesting that conscience is merely a physical reaction of some sort?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Strivax]

Are you suggesting that conscience is merely a physical reaction of some sort?


eudaimonia,

Mark

Not at all. Generally, I conceive of the conscience as a mental 'still, small voice of calm'. And indeed, one that is easily overridden in the pursuit of self-interest. But, I think, in areas where we are viscerally at odds with the good and right, we can be subject to severe physical reactions.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Strivax]

... As we grow and learn, our conscience may tell us different things. Was it right before? Is it right now? Will it be more right in the future? Clearly, it is not infallible, but it's a starting place for learning and growing.

Indeed. I would even suggest, if we all followed our consciences, no matter whether they vary during our lives, we would be learning the lessons God meant for us to learn, when He made us.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[JackRT]

So, for you, JackRT, conscience should be overridden if rational examination finds it flawed? Have I got that right?

Best wishes, Strivax.

Yes.

 

[Strivax]

Yes.

OK. That's fine.

The only difference I have with that position is that rationality is not necessarily moral, while the conscience is absolutely moral. It's the old is/ought dichotomy. Reason tells us about what is, our conscience tells us about what ought to be.

If we ignore what ought to be in favour of what is, we are missing the whole point of what God made us for, which is to experience such love that we will countenance our own discomfort.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The only difference I have with that position is that rationality is not necessarily moral, while the conscience is absolutely moral.

Conscience can be immoral, as your example with Himmler showed. He clearly had no problem with Jews being gassed to death. Rationality could have told him that Jews aren't fundamentally any different from Germans, and that treating them differently wasn't rationally justified.

It's the old is/ought dichotomy. Reason tells us about what is, our conscience tells us about what ought to be.

I don't agree that rationality can't tell us what ought to be. A good deal of philosophy is about reasoning about what ought to be.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Strivax]

Conscience can be immoral, as your example with Himmler showed. He clearly had no problem with Jews being gassed to death. Rationality could have told him that Jews aren't fundamentally any different from Germans, and that treating them differently wasn't rationally justified.

I don't agree that rationality can't tell us what ought to be. A good deal of philosophy is about reasoning about what ought to be.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Hmmm. The point I was trying to make about Himmler was that he was acting counter to his conscience, and it was this that caused him to puke. Had his ideology been integrated with an objective morality of conscience, no such reaction would occur. So, I cannot conceive of conscience that promotes indiscriminate genocide. Can you? Would such a conscience deserve the name of conscience?

And, the rationality that tells us what ought to be is inevitably founded on mindsets that have previously accepted, as axiomatic or assumptive, ideas about the way the world ought to be. eg., If, like Himmler, you consider a world devoid of Jews desirable, reason can get you there. eg., If, like me, you think the world's wealth ought be more justly distributed, reason can tell you how to get there, too. In this way, reason is the slave to morality; our morals determine our reasoning.

But not our conscience.

What reason can't do is provide the 'should' impetus to a political program that aims to bring such results to be. 'Good' results arise out of individual virtue, moral stature, or, indeed, obedience to conscience.

Our consciences, I submit, precede both our moralities and our reasonings.

Best wishes, Strivax.