Targuman Rotating Header Image

Ethics

Mentoring is my life.

I was reminded of this comic this morning. Originally posted in June 2007 it still holds true today. :-)

Kudzu

From Kudzu, by Doug Marlette

 

Oscar Wilde, Philip Davies, morals, ethics and how we read the Bible

On this date in history I was born. And in 1882 Oscar Wilde was ridiculed in Harper’s Weekly. One of the quotes in the NYTimes’ summary of Wilde’s trip to the US caught my attention.

“It is not increased moral sense your literature needs. Indeed we should never talk of a moral or an immoral poem. Poems are either well written or badly written. That is all. A good work aims at the purely artistic effect. Love art for its own sake and all things that you need will be added to it.”

I have read it before, as I am sure many of you had, but had you noticed the allusion to Matt. 6:33? I had not. “But seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” (The ASV sounds about right in this context.) It also brought to mind Jim West’s reference to Philip Davies’ essay on ethics in the Hebrew Bible (is there any? he asks). Jim shared a snippet from Davies’ essay.

Western civilization … does not get ethics from the Bible (and I would say, not even from the New Testament, but I don’t have room to argue that. Go figure.) Ethics develop in a society where individuals have to make their own moral judgments about intrinsic goodness.

Joel Hoffman takes up this quote and rightly questioned Davies’ suggestion that ethics are developed simply when a society decides upon a set of moral principles is a rather dim and limiting view of ethics, and certainly very relativistic.

What Davies was actually addressing the broader question of whether or not atheists can also be ethical since, the straw man says, ethics come from religion.

I repeatedly hear advocates of religion asserting that it is religion that gives humans ethics that bestow value on human life. I have rarely heard anything so ridiculous in my life.

Davies then considers whether the Hebrew Bible contains ethics, presenting the laws and commandments (in quotes for some reason) as the prime examples. He asserts,

this is what much of the biblical “ethics” are — rules that are imposed and expected to be obeyed.

But that is not what ethics is at all, in the Bible or external to it. Rules, laws and commandments may be governed by ethics but they themselves are not ethics and, of course, may not be ethical.

Convenient Interpretation

Non Sequitur by Wiley

This brings us back neatly to the theme of the last week or so, how we read the Bible. Davies is reading the Bible very superficially to make a particular point. One of the great joys and challenges of the Hebrew Bible is that we have to read the narrative carefully to glean from it the message and meaning the authors wished to impart. The laws are there yes, clear and concise. But as I said before, they are not ethics in and of themselves. Ethics may incorporate simple dicta of what is right and wrong, but it is also the broader ethos in which decisions are carried out, whether or not a prescribed ruling already exists for such a decision or not.

Davies offers a number of examples, including a critique of Proverbs. He concludes that Proverbs (and biblical wisdom literature in general, it appears) is fatally flawed.

Yet the more serious flaw is the tendency (mostly outside Proverbs) to equate this “wisdom” to “torah” (divine instruction), and then, to make it worse, to define “torah” as a written corpus of commandments. Hence the wise person, as Psalm 1 has it, is one who meditates on this continually, rather than the one who thinks, reads, or reflect. Ethics out of a can.

I can’t help but wonder if there is a typo in the  penultimate sentence. Did he really mean to say that Psalm 1 is advocating “meditating” on Torah as somehow different and of lesser value than “thinking, reading, or reflecting”? If asked for a definition of meditation both abstractly and as an explanation of what was meant in Ps. 1 I would  say just that; it means to consider deeply, thinking, reading, reflecting on the meaning of Torah. And this is precisely the kind of reading of the text that is required in order to understand the Bible as conveying ethical guidance for the community of faith.1

Finally, I should say clearly that I am not one of those who believes that an non-religious person can be (or behave) in an ethical manner. Of course they can! Just as much as a Christian can behave in a wicked manner (see Jim’s many “total depravity” posts). The Bible is rich and complex and requires careful reading and exposition, from both its proponents and critics. Yet if we believe in a God who created this world and placed it in order, then yes, I do believe that ethics, however one prefers to describe its origins, ultimately derive from the divine.

 
  1. My favorite example to offer my students of an ethical text in narrative is Ex. 1:15-21. Anyone care to discuss this passage in light of the preceding thoughts? []

Conference: Stewardship or Sacrifice? Religion & the Ethics of Climate Change

Things are coming together for our conference at PSU regarding religious and ethical dimensions of climate change. I will be a panelist and I am looking forward to it! From the conference website:

Conference: October 7–8, 2009
Pasquerilla Spiritual Center
The Pennsylvania State University
All events are free and open to the public.


Held at the Pasquerilla Spiritual Center, this conference will examine the role that religion can play in solving the climate change crisis. This interactive conference is open to everyone concerned about climate change, but it is especially designed for members of religious communities in Pennsylvania. Join us for lectures, workshops, films, and liturgy. Learn about the science, the ethics, and the practical steps that Pennsylvania churches and synagogues are taking now to reduce the impact of global warming.

Keynote Speakers:

photo The Rev. Canon Sally Bingham
President and Founder of the Regeneration Project
and Interfaith Power and Light
photo Prof. Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor, Meteorology and Geosciences,
and Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC),
Penn State

For more information:
click here

 

Palin’s Email hacked: ethical question of the day

Wired and others are reporting that Gov. Sarah Palin’s email was hacked by the group known as “Anonymous.” Wikileaks has posted much of the material here, where you can see screenshots of her email accounts, etc. I have lots of questions such as why they (Wikileaks? Anonymous?) chose to post an email from a Palin supporter where she tells Palin that she is praying that “God’s will be done.” Clearly this is illegal and unethical, but here is the ethical question of the day:

Should anyone, the media or Wikileaks, be publishing these emails, contact lists, and screen shots? Is it now “public information” and newsworthy or, as in a court, should it be considered “inadmissible” since this information was illegally required?1

Wikileaks reassures us that they have some standards:

Wikileaks may release additional emails should they prove to be of political substance.

What a relief. And the personal picture posted to the site is clearly of her children lobbying the cross-eyed voter. (NB: Sarcasm)

 
  1. And yes, I am aware that even my going and reading the entry at Wikileaks and referring to one of the emails and photo is perhaps ethically questionable as well. Or is it? []

Ethics should not be digested

or otherwise internalized.

Non Sequitur by Wiley.