Category Archives: Ethics

The MWS Podcast: Episode 26, Martine Batchelor on Ethics from a Buddhist perspective

In this episode Martine Batchelor, a Buddhist teacher and author talks about ethics from a Buddhist perspective and to what extent it differs from more rule based ethical positions. We also explore topics such as absolutism versus relativism, karma, ‘engaged’ Buddhism, the precept of non-harming, laying people off, prisons and her understanding of the Middle Way.


MWS Podcast 26: Martine Batchelor as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_26_Martine_Batchelor

Click here to view other podcasts

Middle Way Thinkers 3: Aristotle

raphael_athens_platoIn Raphael’s famous picture ‘The School of Athens’, the highlighted two standing philosophers in the middle are obviously intended to be the most important. They are Plato and Aristotle. Plato is pointing upwards, symbolising rationalism and its appeal to transcendent reason, but Aristotle is pointing downwards towards the Earth, to symbolise the empirical appeal to experience and the earth. The Buddha is also sometimes depicted touching the ground, in a way that could be taken to symbolise the ‘groundedness’ of his view of things.

The Buddha’s relationship to experience can be seen as the basis of his Middle Way, avoiding either positive or negative metaphysical claims. But can we say the same for Aristotle? The resemblances, at first sight, are striking. Not only is Aristotle often regarded as the first empiricist in the Western tradition (and also the founder of Western science, the first to seriously use observation to support his claims), but he also taught a virtue ethics, with the famous Golden Mean as a guide to how we could identify a virtuous quality. A practical virtue, he said, is found mid-way between the excess and the deficiency of a quality. For example, courage (a true virtue  in his view) is found mid-way between cowardice (the deficiency of courageous quality) and foolhardiness (its excess). Is this an ancient Greek version of the Middle Way?

Sadly, not quite. There is much to admire in Aristotle. He was a multi-talented figure who took an interest in everything from biology to poetry. He learnt from his master Plato and went beyond him. His Ethics, and particularly the chapter on friendship, are of particular interest today. Aristotle can be a great source of inspiration, but he should certainly not be assumed wholesale to have hit the Middle Way. Nor should the Middle Way be described as ‘Aristotelian’. For there are still some basic ways in which Aristotle remains in a set of metaphysical assumptions that might take us off in a different direction.

Aristotle did challenge the metaphysics of Plato, but he also developed his own metaphysics. Rather than basing this on absolute reason like Plato, he made the assumption that we could observe the truth about the world through the senses. Where Plato evidently believed that the Forms (ultimate essences) lay in reason alone beyond the world, Aristotle believed that they lay in each individual thing in the world. Through observation we could work out the essence of a thing, and thus its true purpose. He thus assumed that the world was formatted in a way that would allow scientists to understand it correctly, and that observation of human beings could also show us their true nature and purpose. ‘Man’ he famously wrote, ‘is a rational animal’: meaning that what is essential and distinctive about humans is their rationality. Our true purpose, he believed, can thus be fulfilled by developing that rationality.

The Golden Mean, then, needs to be understood in its context. It’s not a method for taking into account the limitations of our understanding in the whole of experience, as I take the Middle Way to be. Rather it is Aristotle’s account of how he thinks humans can be good and fulfil their true purpose. He believes that we should develop our rational virtues, which help us judge whatever we meet, but we should also develop our practical virtues , which are gained through practice and involve a balance between excess and deficiency. Instead of using the Middle Way to judge both facts and values, Aristotle treats each differently. The facts, he thinks, are known by examining the world and understanding the essential truths about each thing and its purpose. Right values, however, are developed by applying what we have learnt, even though doing that requires practice as well as theory. Even though he has an attractive ethics that emphasises balance and has a strong practical aspect, Aristotle was a naturalist.

Aristotle’s general approach can thus easily be used to justify practices that are believed to have been observed in the world, even though they’re obviously the product of the assumptions made by the observers. That’s why his ideas are still invoked by the Catholic Church today (via their interpretation by St Thomas Aquinas) to support the belief that sex is ‘naturally’ for procreation, and that to use it merely for pleasure is a sin. One can, of course, observe the link between sex and procreation, but the belief that procreation thereby becomes the essential purpose of sex, and then that to do otherwise is wrong, involves a whole pile of dogmatic assumptions.

To get closer to the heart of the Middle Way in ancient Greek philosophy, I think, we must look instead to Aristotle’s near-contemporary Pyrrho. I will discuss Pyrrho in more detail some other time, but the key point here is that Pyrrho was able to pursue sceptical arguments against the supposed ‘truths’ that Aristotelians thought they were able to observe. Sceptical arguments show that there can be no such known ‘truths’, only provisional beliefs. Pointing us downwards towards our experience is a step in the right direction, but empiricism, too, can be dogmatic. It’s only if we can hold our empirical beliefs with genuine provisionality that we start to get closer to the Middle Way.

Link to index of ‘Middle Way Thinkers’ blogs

Forgiveness

As Barry is undertaking a podcast interview with a member of the Forgiveness Project, he suggested to me that I should write something about forgiveness in relation to the Middle Way. This is something I am glad to do, especially after looking at some of the inspiring material on the Forgiveness Project website. I hope that forgiveness is something the Middle Way Society can actively promote, because it seems to me central to the practice of the Middle Way and of integration. All I am going to do here is offer an explanation of why I think this is the case – i.e. to relate the ideas of forgiveness, integration and the Middle Way.

Forgiveness is something that people often think they offer to others who have wronged them. I’m not so sure that this is the main significance of forgiveness. I’d suggest that it would be better to understand forgiveness as a process of integration overcoming a conflict that is both external and internal. The internal representation of the conflict seems to be the one that is most at stake in forgiveness, because bitterness can linger long after overt conflict has finished. What we need to reconcile, primarily, is the part of ourselves that is in conflict with another person with the part of ourselves that is in sympathy with them. If we didn’t have such a rigid view of ourselves to begin with, it would not be a matter of “me” forgiving “you”, or “you” forgiving “me”: rather, we each need to forgive parts of ourselves. Of course external reconciliation can play a powerful part in that, but it may not necessarily be the most important part.

Let’s consider an extreme example: suppose that a child is murdered. It often seems that few voices are more rancorously unforgiving than the parents of a murdered child, such as the parents of Jamie Bulger, who were opposed to the release of the killers eight years later, even though they were only ten at the time of the killing – see BBC article. It’s not surprising that such an event produces huge and violent conflicts in the parents that are still going on eight years later. Any compassion for the killer (who may be in a very confused or brutalised state) is repressed under the power of protective rage and desire for revenge. Yet that compassion for the killer is still present, together with a recognition that the killer is a human being not so different from the victim. The power of the repression may even be expressed through language that denies the human status of the murderer.

Forgiveness can only happen when that compassion, opposed to the protective or retaliatory feelings, is accessed and reconciled with those feelings. When that happens, the protective feelings can finally be channelled in a productive direction that values the welfare of the offender as well as that of the offended. If we think about what might create barriers to that process, the relevance of the Middle Way also becomes evident, for it is metaphysical views that block that integration process. Those views might take the form of absolute beliefs about retaliatory justice in the case of a criminal offence. But there are also beliefs about the self that lead us to identify what we have lost as ‘me’ or ‘mine’, Forgiveness_Barkamenbeliefs about the other as absolutely evil, or even beliefs about God, or other religious or political absolutes. These might stand in the way of forgiveness, because they stop us incrementalising our loss and considering it is the same terms as the losses of those who have wronged us.

Of course there’s also an alternative extreme – that of denying one’s own feelings and engaging in false and premature forgiveness. Forgiveness is not just a matter of telling people we forgive them, or even of telling ourselves we forgive them, but of reflecting both on our own feelings and on the grounds of compassion for the other, whilst cultivating a more generally integrated state of mind in which reconciliation can occur and the two impulses can unite. The same point would apply if it is ourselves we need to forgive – the process of shame or guilt being a similar matter of inner conflict.

If I consult my own experience, I am fortunate not to have ever been wronged in the kind of profound way Jamie Bulger’s parents were. Perhaps the biggest point requiring forgiveness from me involved being wronged by an employer, nearly ten years ago now. I think at that point I was too much concerned with immediate harmony and reasonableness, and should have stood up for myself more at a crucial point. As a result of my not doing so, I felt I was left with no alternative but to resign, and I started to feel my teaching career was over. Forgiveness became necessary for all the wrongs I started to load onto this incident , but it took me a long time to reach. The marker of forgiveness for me was no longer encountering hatred for this former employer in my meditation, but for years I would suddenly encounter it without warning, and realise that it was still there. The forgiveness could not be forced.

It is the Middle Way that makes forgiveness possible – or perhaps, conversely, also forgiveness that contributes to making the Middle Way possible. By avoiding both positive and negative dogmas surrounding wrongs that we have either done or had done to us, we can also avoid either premature and superficial forgiveness or a rigid failure to forgive. Whenever we forgive we need to address the conditions of our own hurt, but forgiveness is surely promoted by the practice of the Middle Way at all levels – for example by critical and reflective thought, by meditation, or by art that expresses and channels our anguish. Forgiveness is never easy, and neither is the Middle Way.

 

Picture: ‘Forgiveness’ by Barkamen (Wikimedia Commons)

The MWS Podcast: Episode 14, Mark Vernon

In this episode, the writer and journalist Mark Vernon talks about agnosticism, its relation to theism and why he feels it’s useful to adopt such an approach. He puts the case for why virtue ethics should play more of a role in how we live our lives. We also discuss influences such as Plato, Socrates, Jung and Iain McGilchrist and how he understands the Middle Way with regards to agnosticism.


MWS Podcast 14: Mark Vernon as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_14_Mark_Vernon

Previous podcasts:

Episode 13: Robert M. Ellis on his life and why he formed the Middle Way Society.
Episode 12: Paul Gilbert on Compassion Focused Therapy
Episode 11: Monica Garvey on Family Mediation
Episode 10: Emilie Åberg on horticultural therapy, agnosticism, the Quakers and awe.
Episode 9: T’ai Chi instructor John Bolwell gives an overview of this popular martial art.
Episode 8: Peter Goble on his career as a nurse and his work as a Buddhist Chaplain.
Episode 7: The author Stephen Batchelor on his work with photography and collage.
Episode 6: Iain McGilchrist, author of the Master and his Emissary.
Episode 5: Julian Adkins on introducing MWP to his meditation group in Edinburgh
Episode 4: Daren Dewitt on Nonviolent communiction.
Episode 3: Vidyamala Burch on her new book “Mindfulness for Health”.
Episode 2: Norma Smith on why she joined the society, art, agnosticism and metaphor.
Episode 1: Robert M. Ellis on critical thinking.