Ethics Since 1900 by Mary Warnock the

¶ … Ethics since 1900" by Mary Warnock The path towards self-realization: tracing the development of moral philosophy in "Ethics since 1900" by Mary Warnock The emergence of the twentieth century gave birth to numerous ideologies and new philosophies that threatened to change the order of human society. Indeed, with the proliferation and influence of the ideology of Karl Marx and the radical and disturbing science of Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytical theory, 20th century society has become more receptive to new thinking about human life and reality.

One common theme that is apparent among these ideologies and philosophies, however, is that they focus on the vitality of the individual in the midst of a rigidly organized and dominantly capitalist society. There is greater emphasis on the development of the individual more than ever, and this trend has encouraged philosophers and researchers alike to pursue more studies and inquiries about the nature and process that an individual undertake throughout his/her lifetime.

Indeed, this attitude is reflected in Mary Warnock's comprehensive discussion on the moral philosophy of the 20th century in the book "Ethics since 1900." Warnock's discussion on moral philosophy reflects human society's preoccupation in understanding the nature of human actions, why an individual acts the way s/he acts, and what is the ultimate end or goal that the individual attempts to achieve in the process of conducting these actions.

The author's discussion is divided into six categories, namely, metaphysical ethics, Moore's moral philosophy, intuitionism, emotive theory, moral psychology, and Sartre's existentialism. Throughout these categories, Warnock attempts to prove an important assertion: that the moral philosophy of the 20th century has centered on personal development, and that this focus has led to more deterministic philosophy, where an attempt to specifically identify the motivations and goal of the individual in acting the way s/he does.

In the texts that follow, evidences from each chapters or categories in the book prove this thesis, and an integration of these result to Warnock's primary objective in the book. The book's discussion of metaphysical ethics centered on the works and philosophy of F.

Bradley, whose explication of moral philosophy in the early 20th century delved into the nature and definition of 'goodness,' or more specifically, of the concept "good." Warnock's preference to discuss Bradley is motivated by the philosopher's inclusion of the process of self-realization as his primary objective as he attempted to elucidate on the nature and definition of goodness.

According to the author, Bradley's concept of 'good' is highly related with that of self-realization, in which "[h]is solution is that the good is self-realization, and that this is the end or the purpose of the moral man's life" (2). The similarity of Bradley's belief with Warnock's provides the reader with a preview of further discussions in the book, which provides support to this initial assertion as explicated by Bradley.

Her discussion of Moore's philosophy furthered her attempt to establish the fact that an individual's ultimate goal is to achieve self-realization. Moore's discussion of the "good" concept is somewhat more deterministic, in contrast to Bradley's relational discussion of goodness with self-realization. Determining the nature and definition of "good," the philosopher countered that what is important is not in attempting to find an appropriate, even correct, definition of "good," but instead in knowing what good is when one sees it.

This is reflected in Moore's assertion on this issue: "Either 'good' is indefinable, or, if it is not, it must either be a complex, about the correct analysis of which there could be disagreement, or the word must mean nothing at all .. We must accept either that the word 'good' denotes a simple unanalysable property or that it denotes a complex and analyzable property, or that it denotes nothing at all" (24).

Applied in the context of identifying one's path towards self-realization, it cannot be said that self-realization is good, simply because, as Moore argued, goodness is an unanalyzable concept. However, like the concept of goodness, self-realization is best identified and determined by experiencing rather than rationalizing on it -- in effect, like goodness, self-realization is only known when one experiences it. Indeed, succeeding studies on the moral philosophy among humans showed an inclination towards equating morality with self-realization.

Or more specifically, these discussions of succeeding philosophies on morality focused on the utilization of a moral standard in order to attain self-realization. In her discussion, Warnock includes intuition, emotive theory, and moral psychology as philosophies that proved her belief that 20th moral philosophy is coursing its path towards a more individualist notion of morality.

Intuitionism is vital to the development of moral philosophy of the 20th century because it is through intuition that an individual learns to identify what is good for them; thus, similarly, it is through intuition that one learns to identify that s/he is experiencing self-realization. Intuitionism is in fact a version of Moore's philosophy, wherein he posited that one knows goodness when one 'sees' it -- that is, goodness is witnessed if the individual feels that s/he had indeed experienced or did an act of goodness.

In the same vein, emotive theory posits that morality is not so much based on rationality alone, but instead, has a lot to do with an individual's expression of his/her feelings. That is, under the emotive theory, one's sense of morality is spurred from expression to action, a process wherein one becomes motivated to act upon towards self-realization. Thus, under the emotive theory, "ethical terms do not serve only to express feeling. They are calculated also to arouse feeling, and so to stimulate action" (83).

From intuition to emotive theory, Warnock goes on.