Lecture 1: Ethics and Morality East and West

Summary

1. Why ethics and morality matter

Professor Anis Ahmad opens by arguing that ethics and morality are central to the rise and fall of civilizations—not merely technology or wealth. The lecture introduces ethics and morality as subjects that shape human conduct and the social order.

2. Ethics, morality, and normative judgment

• The lecturer traces ethics to the Greek ethikos, associated with custom and character, and morality to the Latin moralis.
• He presents ethics as the more theoretical study of moral principles, while morality is their application in a community’s conduct and customs.
• Ethics is described as a normative science: it evaluates human actions as right or wrong, good or bad, rather than only describing what happens.
• This contrasts with positive or descriptive sciences, such as medicine or economics, which describe phenomena within their fields but do not, by that description alone, decide whether an action is morally right.
• Other normative fields offer comparisons: aesthetics evaluates beauty, logic evaluates truth and consistency, and ethics evaluates human conduct.

3. Major approaches to ethical theory

The lecture surveys several distinctions and approaches:

• Axiological or teleological theories emphasize value, goodness, and the ends or purposes of action.
• Deontological theories emphasize duty, obligation, and rules that must be followed.
• Objective ethics treats good and right as existing independently of an individual’s judgment; subjective ethics gives greater weight to human interpretation.
• Ethical naturalists argue that moral truths can be known through empirical observation. Intuitionists appeal to an inner moral sense or intuition. Non-cognitivists treat ethical judgments chiefly as expressions of emotions, attitudes, or recommendations rather than claims of objective fact.
• Ethical relativism holds that standards may vary according to individuals, groups, or states.

The lecturer also summarizes selected philosophers’ views:

• Socrates: It is better to suffer evil than to commit it.
• Plato: Goodness is an enduring form to be realized in human life.
• Aristotle: Happiness or well-being is a goal of life, and virtue involves finding a “golden mean.”
• Augustine: Happiness is a universal principle.
• Kant: Moral conduct is governed by categorical imperatives—duties that are binding.
• Bentham and John Stuart Mill: Utilitarian approaches seek the greatest good for the greatest number; Mill gives particular importance to higher forms of pleasure.
• Nietzsche: Emphasizes the will to power.
• Sartre: Connects ethical choice with personal experience and authenticity.
• John Rawls: Places justice and fairness at the center of ethical judgment.

4. Goodness, action, and intention

• The lecturer distinguishes an ordinary good—something useful for a particular end—from the summum bonum, or highest good.
• People pursue many aims, such as wealth, knowledge, power, love, and service. Ethics offers standards for judging those aims and the conduct used to pursue them.
• Knowing ethical principles does not automatically make someone virtuous. The lecturer compares this to knowing health advice without becoming healthy: moral goodness depends on actually acting well.
• He emphasizes the will and intention behind an action, not merely its outcome or the person’s capacity to act well.
• Several distinctions help assess intention:
  • A wish may not lead to action; an intention or resolution is more firmly directed toward action.
  • Purpose refers to the mental activity or aim, while intention concerns the end an action is meant to achieve.
  • Immediate intention differs from a more distant motive. For example, someone may rescue a person from drowning with different longer-term aims.
  • An action’s outer intention (its apparent purpose) can differ from its inner intention (the personal reason behind it).
  • Intentions may be conscious or unconscious, and two people pursuing the same outward result may have different underlying aims.

5. Ethics and society

Ethics is presented as connected to political, social, economic, cultural, educational, legal, and communication systems. The legitimacy of political power and the control or distribution of economic resources are therefore ethical questions, not just technical ones. A person’s family, profession, community, and other affiliations can also shape their choices.

6. Questions and the lecturer’s responses

• Do religions all teach the same goodness, and how does Islamic ethics differ? The lecturer says religions may all discuss peace, justice, and goodness, but their understandings and sources may differ. He postpones a detailed comparison and says Islamic ethics will be addressed in a later lecture.
• Are there universal moral standards, or are ethics relative? He defines relativism as standards set by an individual, group, or state. A universal standard, in contrast, is binding regardless of whether those parties approve of it. He says a later session will examine universal principles.
• Why is Islam called din al-fitra (the religion of human nature)? The lecturer’s answer is that, in Islam, the Creator—not human consensus—defines what accords with human nature. He contrasts divine guidance with human judgments that may vary across societies.
• Can morality exist without religion, as Kant suggests? The lecturer argues that moral systems devised by human beings remain distinct from principles he understands as divinely revealed, and he gives the Qur’an’s preservation as part of his reasoning.
• Can people determine good and evil through reason or conscience? He cites a hadith’s instruction to consult one’s heart and refers to Ibn Tufayl’s thought experiment about a person raised in isolation. However, he cautions that people are shaped by upbringing and social assumptions, so unaided judgment may not be fully objective; he argues that divine guidance is ultimately needed.
• How do ethics, morality, and akhlaq differ in Islam? He describes akhlaq as comprehensive, combining principles and conduct rather than separating ethical theory from its practice. The Prophet is presented as the model of this integrated character.
• How should Muslims assess newer biomedical questions, such as cloning or genetic modification? The lecturer says the Qur’an, Sunnah, and objectives of Sharia provide guidance on biomedical matters, including artificial insemination, surrogacy, and surgical interventions.
• What are meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics? The response does not give a full three-part explanation. Instead, the lecturer briefly restates the contrast between empirical approaches, intuition, and his view that Islamic ethical judgments rest on objective divine guidance.
• How does philosophical ethics differ from religious ethics? He characterizes philosophical judgments as products of human reasoning and speculation. Religious ethics, he says, vary according to their claimed sources; Islamic ethics is distinguished in his account by its source in divine revelation and prophetic guidance.

7. Overall conclusion

The lecturer concludes that much of the ethics taught across East and West has roots in Greek and European intellectual traditions and, in his interpretation, ultimately reflects human minds, cultures, or social constructs. He argues that Eastern and Western ethical thought are not fundamentally different in their origins or standards, since both can be relative, intuitive, speculative, or individualistic. He contrasts these approaches with Islamic ethics, which he presents as grounded in divine revelation. This is the lecturer’s stated perspective and the subject of the lecture’s framing.

Speakers and sources featured

• Professor Anis Ahmad — main lecturer and respondent to questions.
• Shahram — moderator who introduces the session, reads audience questions, and closes the event.
• Audience questioners: Nuruddin, Al-Hajji, Rakhi Ashraf, Zulkifli, Muhammad Asim, Elhamny, and Faisal Muhammad. An additional final question is read without a clearly stated name.