In moral theory, there are three main ethical frameworks: deontological ethics, character-based ethics, and consequentialist ethics.
In character-based ethics, the most famous by far is virtue-based ethics. But there are other character-based ethics, such as ethics that emphasize chivalry or honor. Ethical systems based on religious precepts could be considered within the first group, that is, deontological ethical systems.
We can analyze the morality and immorality of the actions of Israel and Hamas under any of these ethical frameworks. These ethical frameworks are useful to distinguish whether, for example, when we say that someone is immoral, we are referring to their personal evil in the virtuous sense (in a character-based ethic) or to the consequences of their actions (in a consequentialist ethic).
Unfortunately – from the point of view of clearing up the unknowns in this matter – people do not usually adhere exclusively to one of these frameworks. If each of our meta-ethical frameworks combines all three frameworks, and each of our meta-ethical frameworks is different, and if we are not fully aware of which one it is, each of us will come to different conclusions and it will be very difficult to explain why. It will be impossible to consider which one is better because we are making our analyses from different assumptions, which we have not made explicit. The conversation becomes endless and we do not reach any point.
Also, for some reason this conflict raises passions and attracts all the attention and passionate debates in the West, which is not the case with other conflicts. Why? One possible explanation is that this conflict symbolizes the struggle between two ideologies in the West: one that believes that Western culture, freedom, capitalism, individual rights, and the free market are the basis of the desired welfare state, and another that believes the opposite is true: they are the source of all evil and must be destroyed and replaced by communism, diversity, equality, and equity. The Arab-Israeli conflict offers extraordinary appeal by providing compelling arguments to attack the opposing position in this ideological battle.
1 Comment