The Unseen Architect of Our Moral Lives: The Role of Will in Moral Action (Duty)

Summary

At the heart of every moral decision lies the intricate interplay between our will and our understanding of duty. This article delves into how the philosophical concept of will—that unique faculty of rational choice—is not merely a passive desire but an active force shaping our adherence to moral obligations. Drawing from the "Great Books of the Western World," we'll explore how thinkers from Augustine to Kant have grappled with the will's pivotal role in distinguishing between good and evil, ultimately determining whether we act from duty or merely in accordance with it. Understanding this connection is crucial to comprehending the very essence of human morality.

The Unseen Hand of Moral Choice: Introducing the Will

Have you ever found yourself at a crossroads, knowing what you should do, yet feeling a pull towards something else? That internal wrestling match is where philosophy finds one of its most fertile grounds: the role of will in moral action. It's not just about what we want, or even what we know to be right, but about that mysterious power within us that chooses to act. This is the will, and for centuries, philosophers have sought to unravel its connection to our sense of duty.

Defining the Will: More Than Just a Want

In everyday language, "will" might simply mean a strong desire. But in the grand tapestry of philosophical thought, particularly as woven through the "Great Books," the will is far more profound. It's often conceived as the rational faculty that enables us to choose, to deliberate, and to act.

  • Augustine of Hippo, in works like Confessions and City of God, explored the will's profound capacity for both good and evil. For Augustine, the will (or liberum arbitrium, free will) is central to human responsibility. It's the faculty that chooses to love God or turn away, to embrace virtue or succumb to sin. Our will isn't coerced; it makes a free choice, and that choice has eternal consequences.
  • Thomas Aquinas, building on Aristotle, viewed the will as a "rational appetite." It's not blind desire, but a desire that is guided by the intellect. The intellect apprehends a good, and the will then moves towards it. However, the will retains its freedom to choose among various goods, or even to choose a perceived good that is, in reality, evil.

This distinction is vital: the will isn't just a reflex; it's a deliberative power, capable of directing our actions.

Duty's Demands: The Imperative of Moral Law

If the will is the engine, then duty often serves as the moral roadmap. Duty refers to our moral obligations—what we ought to do, regardless of personal inclination or potential consequences. It's the command of the moral law, felt internally.

No philosopher articulated the link between will and duty more rigorously than Immanuel Kant. In his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant introduces the concept of the Categorical Imperative, a universal moral law that applies to all rational beings, all the time. For Kant:

  • The Good Will: The only thing "good without qualification" is a good will. A good will isn't good because of what it achieves, but simply by virtue of its willing—that is, its intrinsic goodness.
  • Acting from Duty: Kant distinguishes between acting in accordance with duty and acting from duty. If you save a drowning person because you love them, you're acting in accordance with duty. But if you save them simply because you recognize it as your moral obligation, even if you dislike them, you're acting from duty. It is this latter action, driven by a will that respects the moral law, that holds true moral worth.
  • Autonomy of the Will: For Kant, the will is autonomous when it legislates the moral law for itself, rather than being determined by external forces or desires. True moral freedom lies in willing to act according to the moral law that reason dictates.

The Intersection of Will and Duty: A Complex Dance

The will, then, is not merely a tool for executing desires; it is the very seat of moral agency, especially when it comes to duty. It's the faculty that allows us to choose the path of obligation, even when it conflicts with our inclinations.

Consider a scenario: you promise to help a friend move, but on the day, a more appealing invitation arises. Your inclination is to take the new offer. Your duty is to help your friend. It is your will that mediates this conflict. A strong, morally aligned will chooses duty, not out of external compulsion, but out of an internal recognition and respect for the moral law inherent in keeping a promise.

The will's role extends profoundly into the realm of good and evil. It is through the exercise of our will that we either align ourselves with the good or veer towards evil.

  • Plato and Socrates, as depicted in The Republic and other dialogues, often suggested that evil stems from ignorance. If one truly knew the Good, one would choose it. This implies a will that naturally gravitates towards the good once it is intellectually apprehended. However, the question remains: what if the will chooses not to seek or acknowledge the good?
  • Aristotle, in Nicomachean Ethics, offers a more nuanced view. He emphasizes prohairesis, deliberate choice, as a "deliberate desire" involving both intellect and will. For Aristotle, virtue is a state of character concerned with choice, lying in a mean. The will, through repeated virtuous actions, habituates itself towards the good. It is through our choices, made by the will, that we become virtuous or vicious.
  • The capacity for the will to choose evil is a central theme in many philosophical and theological traditions. Whether it's Augustine's concept of turning away from God, or Kant's idea of a will that prioritizes self-love over moral law, the freedom of the will to choose against what is objectively good is what makes moral responsibility—and the fight against evil—so profound.

Philosophical Perspectives on Will and Duty

To further illustrate the diverse yet interconnected views, let's look at how some key thinkers from the "Great Books" tradition approach the nexus of will, duty, and morality:

| Philosopher | Core Concept of Will | Relation to Duty is the only thing that is good without qualification. It is the capacity to act according to the moral law.

Good and Evil: A good will acts out of respect for the moral law; evil is a lack of such respect.

Thomas Aquinas:

Will: A rational appetite, following the intellect's apprehension of the good.

Duty: Conforming one's will to the natural law and divine law, which lead to true human flourishing.

Good and Evil: Good is acting according to right reason and divine law; evil is choosing a perceived good that is not truly good for human nature or contrary to divine will.

Augustine:

Will: Free Will (liberum arbitrium), a faculty with the power to choose or refuse.

Duty: To choose God's will and the good, aligning one's free will with divine command.

Good and Evil: Good is choosing God and virtue; evil is the privation of good, a turning away from God by a perverse will.

Plato/Socrates:

Will: Often seen as subservient to reason; the soul's rational part discerns the Good.

Duty: To live a virtuous life guided by reason, seeking knowledge of the Good.

Good and Evil: Evil stems from ignorance of the Good; true knowledge leads to virtuous action (implying the will follows correct understanding).

(Image: A classical marble sculpture depicting a draped figure, possibly a philosopher like Seneca or Marcus Aurelius, with a furrowed brow, one hand resting on a scroll, and the other thoughtfully touching their chin. The background is simple and austere, suggesting a contemplative space. The figure's posture conveys deep introspection, symbolizing the internal struggle and deliberation of the will in making moral choices.)

Challenges and Criticisms

While the will's role in moral action is undeniable, the concept isn't without its complexities and criticisms:

  1. Clarity of Duty: Is duty always as clear-cut as Kant suggests? What happens when duties conflict (e.g., the duty to tell the truth vs. the duty to protect an innocent person)?
  2. The Role of Emotion: Kant famously downplayed the moral worth of actions driven by emotion. But are emotions entirely irrelevant? Can empathy or compassion not also be powerful motivators for good, and does a will devoid of all feeling truly represent human morality?
  3. Determinism vs. Free Will: A perennial philosophical debate questions the very existence of free will. If our choices are ultimately determined by prior causes (biological, environmental, psychological), then what role does the will truly play in moral responsibility? This is a vast topic, but it directly impacts how we view our capacity for duty.

Conclusion: The Enduring Significance of Will in Moral Life

The journey through the "Great Books" reveals that the will is far more than a simple faculty of desire. It is the crucible in which our moral character is forged, the unseen architect of our ethical landscape. From Augustine's free will grappling with sin and grace, to Aquinas's rational appetite seeking the true good, and especially to Kant's "good will" acting solely from duty, the role of this internal power is paramount.

Our capacity to discern good and evil, to choose the path of obligation over inclination, and to ultimately define ourselves as moral agents, rests squarely on the shoulders of our will. The debates continue, but one truth remains clear: understanding the will is essential to understanding what it means to live a life of conscious, responsible moral action. It is the engine of our ethical journey, forever challenging us to choose wisely and to act dutifully.

YouTube Video Suggestions:

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Kant Categorical Imperative explained""

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Augustine Free Will Evil""

Share this post