Conscience
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conscience is a faculty or sense that leads to feelings of remorse when we do things that go against our moral values, or which informs our moral judgment before performing such an action. Such feelings are not intellectually reached, though they may cause us to 'examine our conscience' and review those moral precepts, or perhaps resolve to avoid repeating the behaviour.
Commonly used metaphors refer to the "voice of conscience" or "voice within".
Contents |
[edit] Definition of conscience
The 1988 Webster's dictionary defines conscience in the modern sense as
- the faculty power, or inward principle which decides as to the character of one's own actions, purposes, and affections, warning against and condemning that which is wrong, and approving and prompting to that which is right;
- the moral faculty passing judgment on one's self;
- the moral sense.
It quotes William Shakespeare's Richard III from the play of the same name as saying:
- My conscience hath a thousand several tongues, And every tongue brings in a several tale, And every tale condemns me for a villain.
and William Whewell:
- As science means knowledge, conscience etymologically means self-knowledge . . . But the English word implies a moral standard of action in the mind as well as a consciousness of our own actions. . . . Conscience is the reason, employed about questions of right and wrong, and accompanied with the sentiments of approbation and condemnation.
Any consideration of conscience must consider the estimate or determination of conscience and the resulting conviction or right or duty.
[edit] Adam Smith
Adam Smith said: Conscience supposes the existence of some such [i.e., moral] faculty, and properly signifies our consciousness of having acted agreeably or contrary to its directions.
[edit] Martha Stout
Martha Stout, Ph.D., in her book The Sociopath Next Door defines conscience as the "intervening sense of responsibility [or obligation] based on emotional attachment [or connectedness]."/
[edit] Differing Views of Conscience
Views of conscience are not mutually exclusive, as can be seen by the quotes above, and by many other scholars. Although there is no generally accepted definition of what conscience is or what its role in ethical decision-making is, there are two main factors that determine which stance is adopted.
- Secular views '(including the psychological, physiological, sociological, humanitarian and authoritarian views.)'
- Religious views '(including the Divine Command Theory, the works of Newman, Aquinas, Butler, Bonhoeffer and so on)'.
- Philosophical views '(including Hegel's Philosophy of Mind)'
[edit] Secular views of conscience
Modern day scientists in the fields of Ethology, Neuroscience and Evolutionary psychology seek to explain conscience as a function of the human brain that evolved to facilitate reciprocal altruism within societies. As such it could be instinctive (genetically determined) or learnt.
[edit] Psycho-Analytical views
The psychologist Sigmund Freud regarded conscience as originating in the superego, which takes its cue from our parents during childhood. According to Freud, the consequence of not obeying our conscience is "guilt," which can be a factor in the development of neurosis.
[edit] Bio-Psychological views
Conscience can prompt different people in quite different directions, depending on their beliefs, suggesting that while the capacity for conscience is probably genetically determined, its subject matter is probably learnt, or imprinted, like language, as part of a culture. One person can feel a moral duty to go to war, another can feel a moral duty to avoid war under any circumstances.
Numerous case studies of brain damage have shown that damage to specific areas of the brain (e.g. the anterior prefrontal cortex) results in the reduction or elimination of inhibitions, with a corresponding radical change in behaviour patterns. When the damage occurs to adults, they may still be able to perform moral reasoning; but when it occurs to children, they may never develop that ability. See
[edit] Conscience as society-forming instincts
The human animal has a set of instincts and drives which enable us to form societies: groups of humans without these drives, or in whom they are insufficiently strong, cannot form cohesive societies and do not reproduce their kind as successfully as those that do. They either cannot survive in nature, or are defeated in conflict with other, more cohesive groups.
Behavior destructive to a person's society (either to its structures, or to the persons it comprises) is bad or "evil". Evil or wrong acts provoke either fear or disgust/contempt. Thus, a madman who threatens us with a chainsaw and one whose sexual practices we ourselves find revolting might both be labeled "bad". Indeed, one does not necessarily need to do anything to be "bad" - a natural coward may provoke contempt, and thereby be a bad person (ie: a coward), even without actually having any occasion to flee from the enemy. And the identification of badness can be quite subtle and involve reasoning. For instance: a sheriff that shoots a gunman is not thereby bad because he is not a threat to an average member of society (as the gunman is), and hence does not provoke fear. Yet gangs of criminals can perceive law enforcement officers as bad people.
Conscience is what we call those drives that prompt us to avoid provoking fear or contempt in others. We experience the operation of conscience as guilt and shame. We feel guilt when we perceive that others might rightly fear us, and shame when we perceive that others might rightly find us disgusting or contemptible. To avoid these negative and unpleasant feelings, we modify our behavior: thus "conscience" prompts us to behave "rightly".
Guilt and shame differ from society to society, and person to person. This both in the content of what acts might provoke these feelings, and the general degree of how strongly these feelings are felt. Indeed, an individual can feel guilt or shame retrospectively for past acts, as one's ideas about right behavior change. A person's circumstances will also alter their ideas of what is "bad". Persons in nations, religious groups, gangs, or other types of groups will - if their group and another are engaged in physical conflict - view members of the other group as "bad", and view members of that gang harming members of their own as wrong acts.
A requirement of conscience, then, is the capacity to see ourselves from the point of view of another person. Persons unable to do this (those suffering from psychopath, sociopathy, narcissism) therefore often act in ways which are "evil".
Another requirement is that we see ourselves and some "other" as being in a social relationship. Persons trying to resolve conflict between groups try (and sometimes succeed) to create a feeling that a social relationship exists, that the groups in conflict all belong to some larger encompassing group. Thus, nationalism is invoked to quell tribal conflict, and the notion of a brotherhood of man is invoked to quell national conflicts. There are even appeals to relationships between ourselves and the animals in society (pets, working animals, even animals grown for food), or between ourselves and nature as a whole. The goal is that once people perceive a social relationship, their conscience will begin to operate with respect to that former "other", and they will change their actions.
Conscience, then, and ideas of right and wrong, are a result of the kind of animals we are. We even see this in nonhuman animals [1][2][3].
[edit] Conscience as maladaptive
Based on the premise that 'feelings of worthlessness' are a maladaptive byproduct of the evolution of rationality, Phil Roberts, Jr. has offered an evolution based perspective that contrasts sharply with the view of conscience as an adaptation:
Conscience (the superego) is a maladaptive manifestation of our need to justify our existence, in this case by conforming to a shared subconscious theory of rationality in which 'being rational' is simply a matter of 'being objective', as exemplified in the moral maxim, 'Love (intrinsically value) your neighbor as you love (intrinsically value) yourself'. Although none of us can actually measure up to this standard, we nonetheless come to experience feelings of worthlessness (guilt) along with a corresponding reduction in the will to survive (depression) when we deviate from the standard to an unreasonable degree. In other words, a capacity for guilt (having a conscience) is a part of the price we humans have had to pay for having become a little too objective (too rational) for our own good. [1]
[edit] Religious views of conscience
According to some religious perspectives, your conscience is what bothers you when you do evil to your neighbor, or which informs you of the right or wrong of an action before committing it. Doing good to your neighbor doesn't arouse the conscience to speak, but wickedness inflicted upon the innocent is sure to make the conscience scream. This is because in this world view, God has commanded all men to love their neighbor. Insofar as a man fails to do this, he breaks God's law and thus his conscience bothers him until he confesses his sin to God and repents of that sin, clearing his conscience. If one persists in an evil way of life for a long period of time, it is referred to as having one's conscience seared with a hot iron. A lying hypocrite is an example of someone who has ignored their conscience for so long that it fails to function.
Many churches consider following one's conscience to be as important as, or even more important than, obeying human authority. This can sometimes lead to moral quandaries. "Do I obey my church/military/political leader, or do I follow my own sense of right and wrong?" Most churches and religious groups hold the moral teachings of their sacred texts as the highest authority in any situation. This dilemma is akin to Antigone's defiance of King Creon's order, appealing to the "unwritten law" and to a "longer allegiance to the dead than to the living"; it can also be compared to the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, in which he claimed that he had followed Kantian philosophy by simply "doing his job" instead of entering a state of civil disobedience [4].
In popular culture, the conscience is often illustrated as two entities, an angel and a devil, each taking one shoulder. The angel often stands on the right, the good side; and the devil on the left, the sinister side (left implying bad luck in superstition, and the word sinister coming from the Latin word for left). These entities will then 'speak out' to you and try to influence you to make a good choice or bad choice depending on the situation.
[edit] Biblical references often cited regarding conscience
- 1 Timothy 4:1,2: "Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron".
- Romans 2:14-15: "[F]or when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them."
[edit] Conscience in Catholic theology
Conscience, in Catholic theology, is "a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1778). Catholics are called to examine their conscience before confession.
Obedience to conscience has been claimed by many dissenters as a God-given right, from Martin Luther, who said (or reputedly said), "Here I stand, I can do no other," to progressive Catholics who disagree with certain doctrines or dogmas. The Church eventually agreed, saying, "Man has the right to act according to his conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters" (ibid., paragraph 1782). In certain situations involving individual personal decisions that are incompatible with church law, some pastors rely on the use of the internal forum solution.
However, the Catholic Church has warned that "rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching...can be at the source of errors in judgment in moral conduct" (ibid., paragraph 1792).
[edit] Conscience in Protestant theology
The Reformation began with Luther's crisis of conscience. And for many Protestants, following one's conscience can rank higher than obedience to church authorities or accepted interpretations of the Bible. One example of a Protestant theologian who caused his church to rethink the issue of conscience was William Robertson Smith of the Free Church of Scotland (1843-1900). Tried for heresy because of his use of modern methods of interpreting the Old Testament, he received only a token punishment. However the case contributed to a situation in which many Protestant denominations allow a wide variety of beliefs and practices to be held by their members in accordance with their conscience (see Presbyterianism#Doctrine).
[edit] Philosophical views of conscience
As science means knowledge, conscience etymologically means with-knowledge. But the English word implies a moral standard of action in the mind as well as a consciousness of our own actions. Conscience is the reason, employed about questions of right and wrong, and accompanied with the sentiments of approbation and condemnation. Any consideration of conscience must consider the estimate or determination of conscience and the resulting conviction or right or duty.
[edit] Medieval conceptions of conscience
The medieval schoolmen made a distinction between conscience and a closely related concept called synderesis. However, there is evidence that this is an artificial distinction, and that the two terms originally meant the same thing.
[edit] Aquinas
St. Thomas Aquinas claimed that it was “reason making right decisions” – so rather than it being "some-thing", it is a process. It must be noted that although Aquinas appears to take on an almost nonchalant view of conscience, he still argued that the reason itself could only come from God. If you are doing good, then it must come from the only source of goodness – God.
For Aquinas, our God-given ability to reason will lead to knowledge of synderesis. Synderesis is an innate awareness of good and evil that cannot be mistaken – we all have this ability to distinguish from good and bad in the same quantity, and feel a moral obligation to act out the synderesis rule – to avoid evil and pursue goodness. Aquinas also described synderesis as an awareness of the five primary precepts as proposed in his theory of Natural Law.
Aquinas referred to the conscience as the 'conscientia' and defined as the acting out of the information given by synderesis, or the process of judgment which acts upon synderesis - the "application of knowledge to activity."
Aquinas also discussed the virtue of prudence to explain why some people appear to be less 'morally enlightened' than others. Prudence is the most important of all virtues, as it helps us balance our own needs with those of others and to reason out the knowledge of synderesis. Our conscience may be mistaken if we haven't acquired enough of the virtue of prudence, which can lead to a breakdown of communication between synderesis and conscientia.
To clarify things, take the analogy of a locked safe. The safe itself is the moral knowledge of synderesis, the key to the safe of moral knowledge is the virtue of prudence, and the hands of practical application that apply the key to unlock the safe is the conscientia.
Aquinas reasoned that acting contrary to your conscience is an evil action, since although it may be mistaken at times it is our only guide. The 'erring conscience' as Aquinas termed it, explains the differences that may arise in different people's concientia. You have an erring conscience if you are mistaken or confused about the moral course of action. The question could be raised however: is an erring conscience blameworthy? For Aquinas, an erring conscience is only blameworthy if it is the result of culpable or vincible ignorance of factors that are within one's duty to have knowledge of. If however, an erring conscience is the result of an invincible ignorance of factors that are beyond your control, your actions are not culpable. One must also be aware of Aquinas’ distinction between real and apparent goods. Although real goods may be from God, apparent goods (when we follow the wrong path believing it to be a real good) are not. An erring conscience may lead us down the path of an apparent good, which will not lead to human flourishing.
Aquinas reasoned that we should educate our consciences in order to act well and bring our selves in line with Hercules. Although it should be applied before an action, it may cause feelings of 'reatus' (guilt) or satisfaction after an action.
[edit] Joseph Butler
Joseph Butler argued that conscience is God-given and should always be obeyed. Butler also said that it is intuitive, as we have the ability to perceive things beyond empirical evidence, and therefore it is considered the ‘constitutional monarch’ and the ‘universal moral faculty’. It would appear that Butler is in striking accordance with Situation Ethics – Fletcher was also an Anglican Priest, which may have played some part in this. Butler refers to the use of ‘self-love’ and ‘benevolence’ in conscience, which can be attributed to the Agape of Situational ethics. As Situational ethics is teleological and assesses each scenario on an individual basis, it would stand to reason that it supports the use of conscience in every decision. However, as Vardy claims, there is no such thing as a conscience in Situational ethics – only the attempts of making appropriate decisions in situations. One could argue that these ‘attempts’ are in fact the conscience itself, and it therefore does support its use in decision-making.
[edit] Simon Soloveychik
According to Simon Soloveychik the truth distributed in the world, as the statement about human dignity, as the affirmation of the line between good and evil - lives in people as conscience. Millions of people for thousands of years sought the truth and reached it, and so, gradually the common knowledge (science), the common message about the truth was defined - con-science. In many languages this word is constructed the same way as in Russian (message is весть and conscience is со-весть). In German Wissen - is knowledge, and Gewissen - is conscience.
He stated that conscience - is a common, one for all, knowledge about what good is and what evil is for humankind. Not for a man, not for his time, not for a group of men, but for humankind as a whole. As language, conscience is individual in each person and it is common for all.
He explained that the truth-conscience enters the man not with genes and not by upbringing: if conscience depended on upbringing then many people would not have known about it at all. It enters the man with a bearer of the common knowledge of good and evil, of the truth - with a common thing - human language. To his opinion, the answer about human conscience is as follows: a man obtains the moral law, which is conscience, through his native language. His consciousness, his self-consciousness, and his soul are forming during the obtaining of speech, his consciousness and his speech - are practically the same thing. In speech and in the language all major images of good and evil, the concept of the truth as well as a concept of the law is available; these concepts and images are becoming a child's own consciousness similar to language. Studying language, its lively phrases, its proverbs, perceiving the folklore, art and literature of his nation, a child is absorbing a common message of good and evil, - his conscience - and besides, he doesn't notice that, it seems to him that conscience occurred somehow by itself.
Soloveychik wrote, "A child sinking in a moral atmosphere of language and culture absorbs drops of the ocean of public consciousness. Genius people by their immense life work raises to such highs of the truth, that these great people are called the conscience of humankind. But both a two year old child, who feels something similar to a sense of guilt for the first time, and a well-known writer, who is called a guardian of human conscience, drink from the same source of common human knowledge of the truth." [5].
[edit] Conscientious acts
A conscientious objector is an individual whose personal beliefs are incompatible with military service, or sometimes with any role in the armed forces. The reasons for refusing to serve are varied. Many conscientious objectors are so for religious reasons—notably, members of the historic peace churches are pacifist by doctrine. Other objections can stem from a deep sense of responsibility toward humanity as a whole, or from simple denial that any government should have that kind of moral authority.
Amnesty International has created the term prisoner of conscience to mean a person imprisoned for their conscientious beliefs.
[edit] Law
In law, a conscience clause is a clause in a law that relieves an individual from complying with the law if it is incompatible with religious or conscientious beliefs.
[edit] World Conscience
World conscience is the idea that with global communication we as a people will no longer be estranged from one another, whether it be culturally, racially, or geographically. Instead, we will approach the world as a place in which we all live, and with newly gained understanding of each other we will begin to make decisions based on what is beneficial for all people.
Related to this idea is the idea of world consciousness. It too, looks at people in terms of the collective, but refers more to the universal ideas of the cosmos, instead of the interconnectedness of choice.In other words, conscience is 'inner voice'
[edit] Endnotes
- ^ Wild Justice and Fair Play: Animal Origins of Social Morality. Retrieved on January 16, 2007.
- ^ Linden, Eugene. The Parrot's Lament : And Other True Tales of Animal Intrigue, Intelligence, and Ingenuity. ISBN 0452280680.
- ^ Von Kreisler, Kristin. The Compassion of Animals: True Stories of Animal Courage and Kindness. ISBN 0761518088.
- ^ See Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
- ^ See Simon Soloveychik, http://www.studyss.freenet.kz/articles/conscience.htm (1986)
[edit] See also
- Consciousness
- Conscientiousness
- Moral value
- Guilt
- Ethics
- Freedom
- Inner light
- John Locke, in particular An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, chapter XXVII "Of Identity and Diversity" where he defines consciousness
- Light of Christ
- Morality
- Moral philosophy
- Moral repugnance
- Original sin
[edit] External links
- A chapter on Conscience From Parenting For Everyone, by S.Soloveychik, 1986
- A Collection of Thousands of quotes on conscience and other topics
- Quotations about Conscience at Liberty-tree.ca
- The Defining Moment for Creating the Culture of Conscience
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Medieval Theories of Conscience
- Taqwa: The concept of conscience in the Quran
- The neural basis of human moral cognition.
