There's a certain type of choice that plays a big role in the thinking of a certain type of ethicist. Its a motivational conflict, in a "resistance to temptation" (R2T) context.
I really want to do X. Perhaps it has been my lifelong habit to do X every morning. I only recently gave up, or tried to give up, on X. Yet the temptation to X now and then still recurs and must be resisted.
At a given moment I either succumb, or I find some non-X diversion and my thoughts thankfully move elsewhere.
My question for today: just how important is R2T. Is it paradigmatic, or is it a side issue? Has it been overemphasized, or the reverse?
What does resistance to temptation have to do with ethics? Ethics applies to a person's conduct that affects the well-being of other sentience beings. Only in some cases does resistance to temptation affect others, and, when it does, it does so indirectly. For example, an alcoholic's resistance to alcohol may benefit the people with whom he lives.
ReplyDeleteAs for your question, the importance of R2T must be assessed relative to something else, or as part of a whole. As stated, the question has no meaning unless a something-else or a whole exists that you have not stated.
This is a further discussion of the kind of thing I had in mind, though as usual I was too lazy to explain: http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~jessegra/papers/MMDOMDG.Self-control%20and%20binding%20morality.JPSP.2017.pdf
ReplyDelete