A Study Of William's Moral Philosophy

The British philosopher Bernard Williams has an important status and influence in the field of contemporary Western moral philosophy. He is especially known for his moral philosophical thoughts featuring distinctive personality and important value. This paper aims to study Williams'moral philosophy in a systematic manner. The study has both theoretical and practical significance. In the theoretical sense, Williams is an excellent perspective to observe the contemporary western moral philosophy; in the practical sense, Williams'moral philosophy has always been based on real life, emphasizing the need to think about and solve problems in line with specific context, which helps us reflect on and judge moral phenomenon.As there are few relevant researches in China, the current paper first briefs Williams'life and then draws a map of his philosophical thoughts with his major works as clues in the introduction.The body of the paper is divided into two interlinked parts consisting of four chapters each. The first four chapters deal with Williams'ideas towards moral philosophical problems, methodologies, roles and limits of moral philosophy while Chapters Five to Eight are devoted to Williams' views on morality.The first chapter introduces Williams'views on the origin of moral philosophy study. Starting with the distinction of "ethics" and "morality", the current author reviews the literature on Williams'moral philosophy. In Williams'opinion,"ethics" and "morality" actually represent two different research paradigms of moral philosophy, and their difference lies in different research start-point. The former one "ethics" mainly answers the Socrates'Question (how should one live?), centered on "virtues" while the latter answers the question "how should one act?" centered on "obligations". The second section of the chapter describes Williams'observations on how moral philosophy study shifts from "how should one live" to "how should one act". He believed that moral philosophy study should begin with "how should one live", which reflects his appreciation of ancient Greek virtue ethics. In the third section, the author examines Williams'study of ancient Greek ethics. A fundamental point is that Williams does not believe that modern moral values are a progress compared with those in ancient Greece. Unlike other modern virtue theorists, Williams yearns for ancient Greece, but recognizes that we can not go back to the past. He aims to uphold the ancient Greek virtue study method rather than to rebuild a virtue ethics (Section IV).Chapter Two discusses Williams'ideas about the possibility and limits of moral philosophy. This chapter can in fact be seen as a review on Williams'moral realism. In the first section, the author examines Williams'comparison of scientific research and ethics research, and his basic conclusion is that scientific research takes a convergent approach towards an absolute reality, whereas ethical studies are perspective without any "absolute reality". Williams believes that ethical knowledge does not have the kind of objectivity in the scientific sense, and therefore can not exist in the form of absolute truth. In other words, there is no absolute truth in ethics, and judgment of truth in ethics can only be made within a relativism framework (Section â…¡). However, the "relativism" advocated by Williams is different from the general "vulgar" and "standard relativism". It is the relativism of distance (Section III). Nevertheless, the fact that Williams opposed "absolute truth" in ethics does not mean that he denied the value of truth. After some pedigree inspection, Williams proved that mankind needs to accept "truth" as virtues regardless of the social status. And in such a way, he defended the value of truth, and refuted the thorough doubt on ethic truth-moral nihilism (Section IV).Chapter Three explores Williams'views on research methods of moral philosophy. Williams advocates a full consideration of the role of history in exploring moral philosophy. Williams believes that any problems should be analyzed in a specific historical context in that history has a special role to play in philosophical ideas, making strange things familiar and familiar things strange (Section I). Therefore, he criticizes the abstract anti-history practice of the meta-ethics which takes linguistic analysis as the only final rationale. Williams proposes the distinction of "thick ethical concepts" and "thin ethical concepts" to clarify the meaning and usage of ethical concepts (Section II). Williams also advocates the history-bonded reflection. As "reflection" is practical rather than theoretical, reflection results are not necessarily ethical theories (Section III). Williams also strongly opposes the attempt to theorize ethics. With extensive proofs, he shows that the abstractness, the universality and authority of ethical theories are unacceptable (Section IV).Chapter Four explores Williams'views on the role of moral philosophy. Williams believes that moral philosophy is first and foremost about how a person should live. It does not make sense if moral philosophy seeks to clarify moral concepts and statement meaning just like meta-ethics does. He also criticizes the phenomenon that modern moral philosophy has been trying to argue for ethics or provide arguments to that end. Williams believes that the only feasible aspect for modern moral philosophy is to provide an illustration or demonstrate the significance of reflections on life.The fifth chapter examines Williams'thinking on the moral premise. Williams believes that the self-identity of personality is the premise for ethical judgments as well as responsibilities for past acts. Williams is against Locke's psychological criteria, however, he believes that the self-identity of personality is based on the "body guidelines"(Section â… ). Personal integrity is to maintain the commitment of the self-identity of personality, and Williams uses "ground projects" to define personal integrity. In Williams'view, we need to consider, as the unique self-identity with personal integrity, how we should live. Personal integrity possesses moral values but is more than moral values.(Section â…¡). The utilitarianism of modern moral theory and Kantian ethics, which maintain a moral view of impartiality, are in gross violation of personal integrity, especially utilitarianism (Section â…¢). Williams, by taking a case, analyzes the "principle of effect" and "the negative responsibility requirements" of utilitarianism about its threat to personal integrity (section â…£).Chapter Six discusses Williams'thoughts about moral values. The author attempts to demonstrate that Williams is in favor of Berlin's value pluralism and its starting point and basic attitude of the study and analysis of the moral phenomenon is the conflict between value pluralism based on empirical observation and the value of diversity (Section I). Based on this position, he opposes the teleological utilitarian that argues the supremacy of the happiness principle and advocates the use of "well-being" to replace the utilitarian happiness (section II). He also opposed deontological Kantian ethics of "moral superiority". Williams denied the Kantian ethics which attempts to pull themselves out from their environment, the fundamental plan, the desire to establish a moral obligation with absolute priority, the practice of inevitability with the exclusion of consideration of other moral and non moral practices (Section III). Williams believes that obligation is just one of the considerations. And the "obligation priority" is a misunderstanding of the moral life, which also has no practical necessity. What's more, there are conflicts between the obligations, which is strongly denied by the Kantian ethics.Chapter Seven illustrates Williams'views on moral reasons. What Williams said about the ethical reasons is a reasonable description for actions. Williams distinguishes two kinds of reasons:the internal reasons and external reasons, and claims the only reasons for actions are the internal ones, not the external ones.(Section I). Williams uses "subjective motivational set" and "practical deliberation" to explain the reasons of actions, in which he links action reasons with people's subjective motivations and desires and points out that applicability of moral reasons depends on the actual motivation (Section II). He also cited the concept of internal reasons to criticize the externalism by modern moral theories represented by the Kantian ethics. Williams believes if the theory of ethics is to play a role in people's action, it must first become "internal reasons"(Section â…¢). Emotions take an important place in a person's subjective motivation. In Section IV, the author gives an analysis of Williams'views on the moral sentiments and his criticism of modern moral theory.Chapter Eight deals with Williams'moral luck theory. Williams holds that moral life is influenced by luck, and luck is caused by things or factors beyond the control of the subject and it may even have a decisive influence on life (Section I). Through a case study, Williams analyzes the formation of luck as well its effect on people's moral life (Section â…¡). He also reveals a special psychological mechanism of people's own choices and actions under the impact of luck-agent-regret (Section â…¢). Williams proposes that "moral luck" is mainly against Kantian ethics, which in his view expressed a moral ideal without any influence from experience. In Section IV, the author examines Williams'criticism on Kant's point that "moral is beyond the influence of luck".In the conclusion, the author gives an overview of the impact of Williams, and uses "reduce the real life" as a summary of his moral philosophy. The reason is that, when we try to understand the concept of human ethical life in the broadest sense, we can say that all of Williams' works, ideas, and avocations attempt to understand and reveal the complexity and diversity of human ethical life. It is through this reflective understanding of life that Williams'moral philosophy is closer to people's actual concerns and real-life practice and is therefore more enlightening.