Discuss the claim that conscience allows people too much freedom to behave as they wish (35 marks)
There is great debate surrounding the idea that the conscience perhaps allows people too much freedom to behave as they wish or whether it is adequate as a guide, of course this debate is dependent on the definition used of conscience, an extremely subjective term. According to the Oxford English Dictionary a conscience is to be defined as ‘an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behaviour’ however this is the view of only some, and there is much debate around the meaning, ability and purpose of the conscience. Theist’s such as St. Thomas Aquinas and Joseph Butler point to God as the source of conscience in contrast to psychologists and sociologists such as Sigmund Freud who point to causes such as authoritative figures shaping our conscience. Equally they disagree on the role it plays, Freud for example suggested it is created as part of the unconscious mind, and believed that it arose as a result of bad experiences early in life, as well as disapproval from parents and society. Butler in contrast would name it ‘’our natural guide’’ given by god to help us act as a moral judge and use reasons to weigh up factors in a moral decision. In this essay I will assess the views of Aquinas, Butler, Fromm, and Freud in relation to the claim and my belief that the conscience does not allow too much freedom.

Italian Dominican theologian St. Thomas Aquinas was one of the most influential medieval thinkers of Scholasticism; he defined conscience as "the faculty of reason making moral decisions". He believed that it is a natural part of mental activity and provides an individual with moral guidance. He called the conscience the recta ratio i.e. right reason. It is not, as Newman said, a voice of God telling us what to do but rather the ability to use rational reasoning in making the distinction between what is right and wrong. He argued that there are 2 parts to making a moral decision: the synderesis, this is the right reason, the awareness of being able to do good and prevent evil; it is infallible and all have the same one from God. For example internally we have the knowledge of the primary precepts such as ‘reproduce’. Secondly: the conscienta, it distinguishes between right and wrong applies this knowledge and makes the moral decision, so to take the knowledge of the order to ‘reproduce’ you would see it to be the moral thing to do and then decide whether to follow it. Although he thought that people generally tended towards the good, he also believed that sometimes working out what good and evil things were and its subjectivity was the main problem.
This is a weak form of conscience, one that can be corrupted in the conscienta step of making a decision; it is able to give us the wrong answers in terms of morality and therefore has the potential to lead to evil acts occurring such as murder, rape and theft. It is merely a guide which we have the ability to ignore, for theists it may be of great use as a theory, with the established aim being to reach the summon bonnum, being in line with the highest good. It could be argued that it does not allow ‘too much’ freedom, for God gave human kind free will so perhaps it is as he intended. For atheists it lacks true meaning as Gods authority means nothing to non-believers and therefore allows full freedom supporting the statement in hand. It does however agree with Piaget’s idea that the conscience is manufactured from experiences and conditioning as Aquinas argued that children do not have fully formed conscience, suggesting that though it can be corrupted, it is up to us to develop it correctly and consequently the conscience is not itself at fault.

In contrast to the religious conscience proposed by Aquinas, Sigmund Freud, an Austrian neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, rejects the idea of conscience being God-given. Freud said that the conscience is socially and psychologically created in order to stop ourselves from carrying out our core desires. He splits the conscience up into three parts. Firstly the super Ego: a blank slate at birth which has moral commands and restrictions written upon it by others as we grow up and learn to understand the world. Influences include authoritative figures such as parents, teacher and even friends. Secondly the Id/physical needs: the place in our minds that deals with passions and desires. Finally the ego: the balance of the two, a moral moderator, the messenger between two extremes. The ego aims to satisfy the id in a way which appeals to the social norms as dictated by the super ego. Unlike Aquinas, Freud rejects reason and accepts that using the conscience isn't rational by any means. A persons experience makes them who they are, each individuals ‘’conscience’’ is shaped by the person’s own experiences and early development, for example a bad experience as a child involving theft may prevent thieving in the future.
This argument is a much stronger form of the conscience, built on societal experiences through our lives and applicable to all rather than just those with religious beliefs. It is not truly controlled, it is a product of experience and therefore will not necessarily lead to the most moral decision, evident in the fact that each persons is different, and as a result it is debateable as to whether the actions are a result of freedom or rather a lack of such.

On the other hand Bishop Joseph Butler: a well-known religious philosopher of the eighteenth century said the conscience was the ‘principle of reflection by which we distinguish between and disapprove of our actions.’ He believed, as Aquinas did, that we have a God-given ability to reason. He believed that humans share a human nature and that morality is simply a matter of following human nature. He believed that humans were influenced by self-love (desire for happiness for the self) and benevolence (desire for the happiness of others). Butler suggests that the conscience adjudicates between these two interests and it behaves as a guide. The conscience is a gift from God and has the absolute supreme & ultimate authority in ethical judgement and its role is to show the way towards the good. It then directs us towards focusing on the benevolence and away from self-love. For butler it is an intrinsic part of human nature and to dismiss morality (which psychologists like Freud & Piaget does) is to deny that intrinsic part of human nature.
This argument from Butler again suggests that we would still have the ability, as atheists at least to ignore the conscience, though it is there and intrinsic, people are capable of knowing murder to be wrong and still continuing it, it is not enforced by anyone but is chosen to be followed. Even Christians have the ability to ignore a religious conscience intrinsic to themselves, for example the crusades were violent and murderous and yet committed by those with consciences pointing them away from murder. It is entirely possible to not follow conscience (which butler likens to following human nature, also possible to ignore), and therefore allows people to conduct actions at their free will, the fact that murder and such can be committed still may suggest to some that ‘too much’ freedom is available but after all I personally feel conscience to be a moral guide and therefore as a guide, we should be free to interpret as we wish.

In conclusion the statement that ‘conscience allows people too much freedom to behave as they wish’ is an incorrect statement; the purpose of conscience no matter its origins (society, the mind or God) is to guide the human kind in morality, free will is necessary to be autonomous beings and therefore conscience should be able to be overridden. It would defeat the purpose of ‘conscience’ if it were to control us. The conscience presented by Aquinas is weak and can be poorly interpreted and does offer too much freedom I believe, to atheists in particular who under it would have no morality. For religious believers however God as the giver of conscience adds more conviction to actions, This applies also to Butler’s beliefs, though I agree with butler’s belief that conscience is a moral guide. Freud offers a good definition of conscience, to be a product of your life, giving explanation for younger people having less knowledge of right from wrong. Overall psychological and sociological understandings present stronger arguments.

.