Now I want to give a conclusion to my previous posts about ethics.
In the last few weeks, I introduce some of the theories in philosophy to
discuss trolley problems, including deontology, utilitarianism, virtue ethics
and existentialism.
In my opinion, for those perspectives that try to explain the
morality, we should put the emphasis on what is the controversial ideas lying
in the problem instead of what is right to do. In other words, our goal is to
clarify the controversy rather than to tell right from wrong. And we may
finally find out that it is more important to see through the problems than to
solve them for most of the disputes, controversies and dilemmas we are
confronted.
After all, like what I said in the previous post, whenever we are
faced with some dilemmas, we seem to make a choice as if we were throwing a
die. The final choice seems to be random and we seems to hesitate our mind in a
mixed feeling. Like Robert frost’s poem “The Road Not Taken”, we stand at the
intersection of a diverged road in the woods. We can’t make up our mind to
choose which to travel, and we may eventually take the one less traveled by or
the contrary. We may tell with a sign somewhere ages and ages hence, but
whatever, choosing which to travel isn’t the most important things here; the essential
part here is to clarify the difference between two roads, and to acknowledge
the difference intrinsically.
And at last, let me repeat the emphasis again: Most of the time, as
we are faced with some controversies, if we can see through the essence of
them, then whatever the result might be, our heart will not be filled with
hatred, and that is enough.
