Lukuvuoden varrelta 2020-2021 Hml lyseon lukio

HÄMEENLINNAN LYSEON LUKIO 31 The above mention quote depicts Robert Scruton’s opinions on the morality of human beings and the nature of society. The quote is a synthesis of both ethical and societal stand- points, and it is fairly different from the ”usu- al” thoughts that are heard in ethics and po- litical philosophy. The quote formulates a pic- ture of a society, where instead of state-con- trolled law and order, moral constraint and good behaviour are found through the laws of sympathy and family love. This statement echoes through the nature of humans, the ba- sis of society and morality, and also, the im- portance of family. These are all widely dis- cussed through western philosophy. In this essay I aim to illuminate these philosophical questions by showing its relevance, impor- tance but also its flaws. The first sentence explains the quote’s main thesis, and the rest builds the argument fur- ther. Scruton says that a society consists of free beings, bound only by the laws of sym- pathy and family love. This is a fairly liber- al claim, and it aims at the maximal amount of freedom. This is not the most usual claim, since there are many people who see the re- strictions of the state important. For exam- ple, in political philosophy, Thomas Hob- bes, thinks that the only way to make a well behaving society, there must be laws and a strong leader to constraint the egoistic and violent nature of humans. For contrast, Jean- Jacques Rosseau thought that society should restrict very little, because humans are, by na- ture, good and well behaving. Scruton’s opin- ion is further fromHobbes than Rosseau, but Rosseau doesn’t tell the whole story either. Scruton takes a whole other route and says that humans aren’t necessarily bad or good by nature, but they are or should be still con- trolled by ”the laws of sympathy and obliga- tions of family love.” I will go further into this later in the essay, since it is not a clear area in the quote. ”A free society is a community of free beings, bound by the laws of sympathy and by the obli- gations of family love. It is not a society of people released from all moral constraint–for that is precisely the opposite of a society. Without moral constraint there can be no cooperation, no family commitment, no long-term prospects, no hope of economic, let alone social, order.” Roger Scruton: ”The Limits of Liberty” (2008) Erno Taipale Hämeenlinnan Lyseon lukio