Jonatthan Bennett article
What is the main message of Bennett's article, and how is each of the three characters relevant?
Jonathan Bennett uses Huckleberry Finn, Heinrich Himmler, and Jonathan Edwards as examples of the conflict relationship between “sympathy” and “bad morality” in order to show the value of conscientiousness. Bennett doesn’t try to offer solution for such conflicts, but instead make us to think more deeply about the role of sympathy and conscientiousness in moral thinking. By sympathy, Bennett means “every sort of fellow-feeling as one feels pity over someone’s loneliness or horrified compassion over his pain”. These feelings should not be confused with moral judgments. What Bennett means by the definition of “bad morality” is: “a morality whose principles I deeply disapprove of”.
Bennett argues that sympathy and bad morality can conflict in particular cases. For example, Huckleberry Finn helps his slave friend Jim to escape from his owner Miss Watson; and as a result Huck suffers sever twinges of conscious. Huck’s conscious mirrors the morality of 19th century rural South States where slavery was OK. Huck enables Jim to escape but acting weakly and wickedly. In this conflict between sympathy and morality, sympathy wins. However, what Huck didn’t see is that one can live by principles and yet have ultimate control over their content. According to Bennett, Himmler too experiences an inner conflict between sympathy and bad morality as he managed the implementation of “final solution of the Jewish problem” of Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, Himmler’s bad morality overcame sympathy and killed millions of Jews. He thought sympathy is for weak people. Himmler suffered a variety of nervous and physical disabilities as a result of conflict between will and obligation and his psychic division which extended over his whole life.
Bennett believes that Edwards’s morality was worse than Himmler’s. Edwards had a faulty, emotionless view of human free will. He was a hard
Jonathan Bennett uses Huckleberry Finn, Heinrich Himmler, and Jonathan Edwards as examples of the conflict relationship between “sympathy” and “bad morality” in order to show the value of conscientiousness. Bennett doesn’t try to offer solution for such conflicts, but instead make us to think more deeply about the role of sympathy and conscientiousness in moral thinking. By sympathy, Bennett means “every sort of fellow-feeling as one feels pity over someone’s loneliness or horrified compassion over his pain”. These feelings should not be confused with moral judgments. What Bennett means by the definition of “bad morality” is: “a morality whose principles I deeply disapprove of”.
Bennett argues that sympathy and bad morality can conflict in particular cases. For example, Huckleberry Finn helps his slave friend Jim to escape from his owner Miss Watson; and as a result Huck suffers sever twinges of conscious. Huck’s conscious mirrors the morality of 19th century rural South States where slavery was OK. Huck enables Jim to escape but acting weakly and wickedly. In this conflict between sympathy and morality, sympathy wins. However, what Huck didn’t see is that one can live by principles and yet have ultimate control over their content. According to Bennett, Himmler too experiences an inner conflict between sympathy and bad morality as he managed the implementation of “final solution of the Jewish problem” of Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, Himmler’s bad morality overcame sympathy and killed millions of Jews. He thought sympathy is for weak people. Himmler suffered a variety of nervous and physical disabilities as a result of conflict between will and obligation and his psychic division which extended over his whole life.
Bennett believes that Edwards’s morality was worse than Himmler’s. Edwards had a faulty, emotionless view of human free will. He was a hard