âMorality: An Introduction to Ethics by Bernard Williams.â
âI went quickly over the opening lines: âWriting about moral philosophy should be a hazardous business,â not least because in doing so âone is likely to reveal the limitations and inadequacies of oneâs own perceptions.ââ
âI liked this man already, his air of unpretentious authority, and I read the whole book that evening.â
âIt was barely a hundred pages long and went briskly through such questions as whether moral judgments are all subjective, whether morality needs God, whether life has a meaning, and whether what makes something the right thing to do is the fact that it maximizes general happiness.â
âOn that last question, Williams allowed that any half-decent moral outlook had to pay some attention to âwhat men in fact find value in, or need, or want.â But he didnât think this had to be happiness. He was drawn to a phrase of D. H. Lawrenceâs: âFind your deepest impulse, and follow that.ââ
âWilliams added:
The notion that there is something that is oneâs deepest impulse, that there is a discovery to be made here, rather than a decision; and the notion that one trusts what is so discovered, although unclear where it will leadâthese, rather, are the point. The combinationâof discovery, trust and riskâare central to this sort of outlook, as of course they are to the state of being in love.â
âI went looking for the original quotation from Lawrence, but only found the less resonant âResolve to abide by your own deepest promptings,â and âTry and find your deepest issue, in every confusion, and abide by that.â I preferred how Williams had put it, his prose there, as everywhere, pared down, elegant and uncynically perceptive. What did it for me was that âof courseâ in his last sentence, its appeal to shared experience, its air of solidarity, almost of collusion: itâs just us human beings here.â
âUnhedged with cautious qualifications, his sentences demand something beyond a knack for spotting the fallacy, not cleverness but a richness of sensibility. They goad you to distinguish what you actuallythink from what you think that you think (under the influence of some premature, dishonest generalization).â
âMore than one reviewer complained that the compression of Williamsâs prose made him dangerously easy to misunderstand. But Williams wouldnât grant the assumption that one should write, as the Roman rhetorician Quintilian had recommended, so that one cannot be misunderstood. Williams thought this advice indeterminateâmisunderstood by whom? One writes for an imagined reader with whom one shares something: intelligence, seriousness, knowledge and so forth. âBut that reader will also have thoughts of his own, ways of understanding which will make something out of the writing different from anything the writer thought of putting into it. As it used to say on packets of cake mix, he will add his own egg.â A readerâs thought, Williams said, âcannot simply be dominated ⌠his work in making something of this writing is also that of making something for himself.â â
Navigation
Backlinks
There are no backlinks to this post.