Joseph Butler -- Conscience and morality --Theistic response to deism --But also a response to DCT & Natural law

--Contra both theories, morality is not imposed from outside us (by God's commands or natural moral laws --!oral impulses"#ud$ments are so stron$ly felt that they must arise in our own nature Ground of morality: Human nature %uman nature is comple&, many different components But there is a hierarchy 'nd C(N)C*+NC+ is hi$hest in hierarchy Df,-the reflecti.e or rational faculty which discerns the moral character of actionsNB/ conscience discerns morality of actions, not persons or principles NB/ .ery similar idea of conscience to '0uinas', but $i.en central role rather than merely bein$ an afterthou$ht1 Conscience ma2es the ri$ht and wron$ perfectly clear1 Conscience also re.eals our obli$ation to do the ri$ht !oral 2nowled$e is in each of us1 --3i2e '0uinas, Butler sees desi$n and order in nature --By understandin$ nature, we learn God's intent )o, the $ood is what is in accord with human nature But what is human nature4 --'ll thin$s in nature are )5)T+!) (comple& sets of thin$s where the whole is more than the parts --)o we must not focus on indi.idual components of human nature but loo2 for the bi$$er picture -- the system as a whole1 --e1$1 our appetites, desires, passions, & reason are all parts of human nature --but no one appetite etc1 e&plicates what human nature is --need to understand components and then put them to$ether to understand the system )o, human nature is a comple& of appetites, passions, & reason in the indi.idual person 6e can also loo2 for hi$her le.el of or$ani7ation by ta2in$ another step bac2 and loo2in$ at $roups of humans1 8ust as one appetite does not fully e&plicate an indi.idual human nature, so too one human cannot fully e&plicate all humanity1 )o we need to loo2 at humanity in $eneral, and not focus o.ermuch on indi.iduals (i1e1 -+&ceptions(nce we understand human nature, we can learn the purpose of it

The Purpose of human nature 9/ 6hat do humans care about4 '/ their own welfare, health, pri.ate $ood, happiness 9/ and nothin$ else4 '/ we also care about others: (-Bene.olence%umans are not simply selfish creatures; we are also social"bene.olent1 )o, we were made for both self-lo.e and bene.olence1 Both are e0ually natural (e0ually part of human nature 1 !any of our passions and appetites, we will see upon reflection, are really moti.ated by either self-lo.e or bene.olence1 *n addition, self-lo.e & bene.olence do not naturally conflict (as 'yn <and mi$ht claim but are compatible1 They e.en wor2 in harmony much of the time1 Self-love 9/ 6hat is self-lo.e4 *s it #ust -6antin$ stuff and $ettin$ what we want- ($ratifyin$ our impulses *f it feels $ood, do it4 '/ N(: Butler's ar$ument = > ? @ 6hat is the ob#ect of self-lo.e4 ' lifetime of happiness (an internal $oal 6hat is the ob#ect of $ratifyin$ a desire4 )ome e&ternal ob#ect (an e&ternal $oal *f two thin$s ha.e different ob#ects, they are themsel.es different1 )o self-lo.e and the $ratification of desire are different thin$s1

Conscience: the supreme governing principle %uman nature, then, is a comple& set of impulses/ --appetites & desires --self-lo.e --bene.olence --etc1 These may at times coincide but also may conflict1 <i$ht now, perhaps you ha.e a number of conflictin$ impulses/ --*'d li2e to ha.e a drin2 of water; *'d li2e to $o home and sleep; *'d li2e to call my friend; *'d li2e to smo2e a ci$arette; *'d li2e to ha.e that thin$A But you ob.iously don't act on all of them (you mi$ht not act on any of them 6%54

6e also ha.e the ability to #ud$e and re#ect impulses (* can't $o home and sleep, *'ll miss class: 6e can decide that an impulse is incon.enient, or inefficient, or self-destructi.e, or harmful to others, and don't do it1 This faculty of #ud$ment & reflection is a -Go.ernin$ principle- in that it $o.erns (rules our actions1 *t is called C(N)C*+NC+1 ($o bac2 to df 9/ %ow does conscience relate to the principles of self-lo.e and bene.olence4 '/ Conscience is the superior principle (o.er both 1 *t has authority o.er all of our impulses and principles1 BBT/ 9/ 6hy do we sometimes do thin$s our conscience says not to do4 (r fail to do thin$s our conscience says to do4 '/ Need to distin$uish authority"power Conscience has hi$hest authority, not -Cower6e could be o.ercome by a stron$ passion and act a$ainst our conscience1 But we (BG%T to ha.e done what conscience commands1 )elf-lo.e and bene.olence can ha.e more power than conscience, which e&plains why we mi$ht act selfishly or selflessly1 Conscience would arbitrate conflicts, but sometimes our impulses are too stron$1 Conscience and human nature 9/ 6hy ou$ht we to follow our conscience4 '/ Conscience $ets it authority from human nature1 6e %'D+ a conscience and feels its counsel1 8ust as animals follow their instincts, we ha.e conscience which naturally compels us to follow it (e.en if it cannot always win o.er other desires 9/ But why are we obli$ated to follow our conscience4 '/ Because it is human nature to follow the conscience1 'll obli$ations (as opposed to impulses come from the conscience1 *f we had no conscience, we would be mere animals -- followin$ e.ery impulse we felt1 ') humans, we are -autonomous- -- self-$o.ernin$ -- and it is conscience which ma2es us so1 This, he says, is self-e.ident1

C<(B3+!)/ = *s the law of conscience really self-e.ident4 --The flatness of the earth; the earth as center of uni.erse were both self-e.ident at one timeA > 6hat if two people feel that conscience leads them to opposite moral #ud$ments4 --Butler would say that as a rational principle, it cannot draw two opposite inferences from the same premises so there must be somethin$ else that accounts for disa$reement1 --But how can we decide amon$ differin$ consciences4 ? 6hat about the sociopath4 --Butler already said/ don't base your understandin$ on e&ceptions, loo2 at the rule1 --But as E indicates/ doesn't this ma2e sociopaths less than human, more li2e animals4 @ Butler's psycholo$y is tied to =Fth"=Gth Century ideas we no lon$er belie.e1 --this could be a fatal flaw, since he did try to start from empirical obser.ations H Butler needs to e&plain how the conscience ma2es #ud$ments1 --not a fatal flaw but an area in need of de.elopment

The most si$nificant recent challen$e to Butler's moral theory is by Nicholas )tur$eon (=IGF , a reply to which appears in )tephen Darwall (=IIH 1 --http/""www1iep1utm1edu"b"butler1htm