[PREV - A_CHOMSKY_PROBLEM] [TOP]
ETHICAL_FACULTY
April 02, 2013
September 01, 2013
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n23/colin-mcginn/in-and-out-of-the-mind
Colin McGinn,"In and out of the mind"
London Review of Books,
Vol. 15 No. 23 ยท 2 December 1993
(A review of "Philosophy" by Hilary Putnam):
"Moreover, according to Chomsky, it is plausible to see our
ethical faculty as analogous to our language faculty: we
acquire ethical knowledge with very little explicit
instruction, without great intellectual labour, and the
end-result is remarkably uniform given the variety of ethical
input we receive. The environment serves merely to trigger and
specialise an innate schematism. Thus the ethical systems of
different cultures or epochs are plausibly seen as analogous to
the different languages people speak-- an underlying universal
structure gets differentiated into specific cultural
products. So, while science must depend on faculties whose
biological purpose is not itself science-- or anything very
close to science-- ethics seems far more deeply embedded in our
original mental design. Perhaps the innate system of
commonsense psychology, installed to negotiate our social
relations, contains the resources for generating the basic
principles of ethics. But there is surely no prospect that
knowledge of quantum physics or evolutionary theory will be
found to stem thus directly from anything with a well-defined
biological function. On the Chomskyan model, both science and
ethics are natural products of contingent human psychology,
constrained by its specific constitutive principles; but ethics
looks to have the securer basis in our cognitive
architecture. There is an element of luck to our possession of
scientific knowledge that is absent in the case of our ethical
knowledge."
(But whoever heard
of an ethical faculty?)
--------
[NEXT - DUAL_CHOMSKY]