Given 1: Each person is obliged by their conscience to
behave morally. (Side question: is it a moral absolute to not be a hypocrite?)
Question: What is the source of the conscience’s moral
authority?
Comment on Given 1 – The argument presupposes that people
have, as part of their being, something that serves as an internal guide to
what is just, ethical, and praiseworthy. This something is commonly called
conscience. The question is not what conscience is; but rather, why it is
authoritative, in other words to whom are we obliged.
Neither the variable nature of conscience between
individuals nor the lack of development in others would be a flaw in the
argument itself. Anyone can see that people vary with respect to many other
traits like physical stature, dexterity, and intelligence. There is no reason
to suppose otherwise for conscience.
Premise 2: The obligation to obey the conscience must come
from either Nature, the Individual, the Collective (family, tribe, or state),
or something external to the first three.
Premise 3: Nature does not oblige anyone to follow their
conscience, since the conscience often prompts us to overcome the non-reflexive
innate behaviors it provides.
Premise 4: The individual does not have to authority to
oblige themselves to follow their conscience since the individual could then
back out of that obligation by his own authority. As such, self-obligation is
meaningless.
Premise 5: No collective of individuals has the authority to
oblige someone to follow a collective conscience unless the individual consents
to that authority, who have no authority to give as per Premise 4.
Comment on Premise 5 - The collective (family, tribe, state,
etc.) may have the power to impose duties on individuals, but that is not the
same as having the authority to do so.
Conclusion 6a: The moral authority of conscience comes from
a source that transcends Nature, the individual, or the collective.
Conclusion 6b: The conscience has no moral authority.
