Mediation

This chapter develops the issue concerning encroachment and considers a possible response to it, which is ultimately rejected. The response starts with the thought that the problem arises because we each have a conception or understanding of life by which our relations to one another are mediated—where the obvious solution may then seem to be to relate to each other in a direct or unmediated way, without bringing any conception of life to bear on our relations to one another. Having a medium between people may lead to encroachment, nonetheless the lack of a medium can do the same. This argument is illustrated by reference to the literary work of D. H. Lawrence, showing how characters such as Will Brangwen and Anna Lensky in Women in Love hope to find a kind of unmediated relationship, but in a way that leads to a breakdown of the love between them.

The Ethical Decision

This chapter considers a variety of ways in which, as fundamentally self-interested individuals, we try to camouflage that self-interest by making it look as if we are behaving rightly: for example, by evading an ethical action by insisting that it requires further reflection, or by inspecting our motives so that the time for action has passed. We reason in this way because we do not like being griped by the decision, and required to act. Nonetheless, our conscience can make us aware of these evasions, while also, in certain extreme or ‘heightened’ situations, we can still come to do the right thing, even while in more ordinary circumstances, when the risks are a lot less, we remain oblivious to the needs of others.

Is There a Christian Ethics?

The central theme of this chapter is to assess how far the project with which we started has been fulfilled, which was to characterize Jesus’s proclamation to love the neighbour in purely human terms. Against the objection that the demand is silent, while Jesus tells us how to behave in relation to one another, it is argued that the latter is in fact not the case, and Jesus offers no concrete moral guidance. It is conceded, however, that a Christian perspective may find it easier to explain the radicality of the demand, insofar as it treats life as a gift from God—and this issue is taken up in Chapter 6. This chapter concludes by arguing that nothing gives the Christian any special insight into morality, so that in that sense there is not a specifically Christian ethics.

The Radicality of the Demand and the Social Norms

This chapter focuses on the radicality of the ethical demand, and how that sets it apart from social mores and laws. It is argued that because the demand is silent or unspoken, we must then respond selflessly for the good of the other person, while it may also interfere with our lives, and could include love of the enemy. The radicality of the demand then expresses itself in the fact that a person has no right to make the demand, while it isolates or makes responsible the person on whom it falls. At the same time, the radicality of the demand does not mean it is limitless. However, as we cannot rely on people to act as the demand requires, we also need social norms, which are not radical in these ways. The relation between the demand and these norms is explored, and each is argued to require the other.

The Fact from Which the Silent Demand Arises

This chapter begins by focusing on trust, which is a key example of our dependence on other people, and is integral to human life. In trusting another person, we deliver ourselves up to them by making ourselves vulnerable, which is why we react strongly when this trust is abused, and our vulnerability is thereby ignored. Given the risks involved in this vulnerability, conventional forms and practices are brought in to regulate our interactions. In response to this dependence, and the way in which their life is in our hands, we are required to do what is best for the other person—which may not be what they want us to do, so the demand is ‘silent’ in this respect, as it is not articulated through what they ask of us. However, this does not mean we can encroach on their individuality, or impose our ideas on them as an ideology.

Antagonism towards the One-Sided Demand

This chapter focuses on another key feature of the ethical demand, namely that it is non-reciprocal or one-sided, in the sense that a person cannot make a counterdemand for coming to help another person. It is argued that this feature of the demand makes sense if a person thinks that life has been given to them, and so cannot demand something back. However, it is suggested that this outlook is compatible with thinking that there is no God as a gift giver, so that the Christian perspective is not essential to make sense of this view. Another challenge to this conception might be that life is not a gift, but a curse, if one’s life is left empty by the death of a loved one, or tormented by illness; this challenge is considered in the last section of this chapter.

Introduction

The Ethical Demand begins by considering Jesus’s proclamation to love one’s neighbour as oneself. It is argued that unless we can make sense of this proclamation, it would be a merely coercive commandment, which we would follow without any understanding. In fact, however, it is claimed that the proclamation can be made sense of in purely human terms, as a demand that arises out of our mutual dependence and vulnerability. This demand is said to be silent, radical, one-sided, and unfulfillable, in a way that is explored in what follows. The Introduction concludes with some methodological remarks, in which it is argued that the best approach involves paying careful attention to key conceptual distinctions, rather than adopting an overly systematic methodology.

Polemical Epilogue

This chapter offers a critique of Søren Kierkegaard, as well as contemporary Kierkegaardians such as K. Olesen Larsen. It challenges Kierkegaard’s own account of the love commandment offered in the latter’s Works of Love. It is argued that Kierkegaard denudes our existence as living creatures of real value, and so makes our relation to God paramount. The command to love the neighbour therefore no longer becomes a command to care for the other person in their human needs, but instead to put them into the right relation to God. It is argued that this is a fundamental distortion of Jesus’s intention as illustrated by the parable of the Good Samaritan: here, it is earthly concern that is on display, and thus a valorization of all our human vulnerability on which the proper understanding of Jesus’s proclamation must rely.

Poetry and Ethics

This chapter considers the underexplored topic of the relation between ethics and poetry. It is argued that what draws us to poetry is not to experience the beautiful, but rather the way in which poetry has the capacity to cut through the triviality of much of our daily lives, and thus to pay proper attention to our surroundings. This kind of attention is equally necessary if we are to engage with others in an ethically responsive manner, which is where the connection between poetry and ethics can be seen. The poet could not achieve this effect if their poetry were merely a matter of subjective expression, so that while they must tell us about the world as they see it, it must also open us up to what is around us. In this way, poetry can give us the kind of experience that philosophy can only help us understand.

Science and Ethics

This chapter considers the relationship between ethics and our modern scientific world picture, both as regards metaphysics and as regards scientific determinism. The first issue arises because the ethical demand seems to involve a judging authority who holds us responsible for failing to meet it, where it is not clear that this authority can simply come from other people, as they are as flawed as us. But then it may appear that ethics is committed to a position which is metaphysically suspect, in introducing this authority into the picture. The second issue arises because determinism may seem to deprive us of any moral responsibility, insofar as our actions are determined. This chapter argues that responses to both these challenges can be met.