Moral intellectualism: virtue is found in knowledge

Moral intellectualism is an ethical and philosophical position that defends that there are no bad people, only ignorant ones. That is to say, Those who act morally incorrectly do so because they do not know what good is. For his part, he who does know it will always practice it; because he realizes that it is the true path to happiness.

This position was proposed by the Greek philosopher Socrateswhose ideas had a great influence on the ideas of his disciple Plato.

Next, we will detail what moral intellectualism consists of and present the criticisms that have been made about it.

What is moral intellectualism?

Moral intellectualism defends that knowledge of what is just and correct, from an ethical point of view, is sufficient for human beings not to commit any evil act. In other words, It is enough to know what justice is to be able to be fair.and know what is good to be able to act in accordance with the good.

The first formulation of moral intellectualism was made by Socrateswho proposed autognosis (defined by the Greek philosopher as knowing what is right) as an essential condition, and at the same time sufficient, for man to act correctly.

In this way, Socrates assumes that As soon as the person acquires knowledge of the good, he will act in accordance with it. Furthermore, he defends that the opposite also happens. That is, if someone does not know what is morally right, he will act in a wrong and evil way.

That said, if an individual were to perform an ethically incorrect action, it would not be their fault, but rather the fact that they have not accessed that knowledge. Well, for Socrates, there was no possibility that someone, simply by his will, could act wrongly. This suggests a kind of determinism, since it leaves aside free will.

According to the theory of moral intellectualism, if a person acts incorrectly it is because they do not know what is just and correct.

Origin and development

Moral intellectualism is based on anthropological dualism, which postulates that the human being is made up of two substances: the physical, which is the body; and the immaterial, which corresponds to the soul. Understanding the latter outside of any religious conception.

Now, for Socrates, the soul is the most important part of the human being; because that is where the well-being of beings resides. This well-being will only be achievable through virtue (doing the right thing); which, in turn, is achieved through knowledge (of the truth, not of the scholar).

That is, being virtuous will lead to righteous behavior, which will lead to happiness and satisfaction.

Convinced of this and as a citizen concerned about his compatriots, Socrates begins to develop this theme in what can be considered one of the first works on morality and ethics.

Moral intellectualism in politics

At this point, it is pertinent to highlight that Socrates did not leave any of his thoughts in writing. All of them transcended thanks to the works of his disciple Plato.

This is important because, according to some authors, certain implications of the theory of moral intellectualism, in the field of politics, obey more to the beliefs of the student than to those of the teacher.

However, it can be said that Socrates was the first to introduce moral intellectualism into politics. Well, This philosopher defended a form of government in which those who knew what was just and correct reigned, because only they were capable of seeking good for the city.

That said, moral intellectualism in politics becomes evident with the following reflection by Socrates:

“When one of us is sick, he does not propose a vote among the members of the family to establish which remedy is suitable to cure the illness. Instead, he calls the doctor and submits to his expertise. When we want to build a building we do not take a vote to decide how to build it, but we let the architect impose his criteria.”

To which Socrates asks: “why when it comes to the most important thing of all, which is the common good and the proper establishment of laws, do we let everyone have their opinion, do we submit to the majority and do not call that Who knows?”. So, For moral intellectualism, political matters also have to be left in the hands of experts.

Later, in Plato’s work, these thoughts are systematically developed; Well, this author firmly defended a government run by the most capable. Being wise and, therefore, good and just, it is assumed that he would seek the well-being and happiness of each citizen.

For Socrates, it is essential that the government be made up of people who know what is just and correct.

Criticisms of moral intellectualism

One of the main criticisms of moral intellectualism revolves around the notion of knowledge. that Socrates said. It is well known that he did not mean to acquire more information or to be a great mathematician, but he never clarified what the nature of it was.

On the other hand, although his thought was widely accepted in his time, the Aristotelian ideas on ethics, later developed, caused moral intellectualism to be overshadowed.

Faced with the Socratic approach, Aristotle placed special emphasis on the will to do goodconsidering that simple knowledge was not enough to ensure that man behaved morally correctly.

You might be interested…