А С Г A U N I V E R S I T A T I S L O D Z I E N S I S __ ______FOLIA PHILOSOPHICA 6, 1988
Ewa Nowicka-Wlodarczyk
MORAL PROGRAMMES 3F NONVIOLENCE - SOME CONDITIONS OF THEIR EFFECTIVE REALIZATION
The c o n s i d e r a t i o n s to be p rese nted below a re based on two p rem ises. F i r s t of a l l , i t i s assumed here t h a t i t i s m o r a lly d e s i r a b l e to c o n s t a n t l y expand the use of n o n v i o l e n t programmes in s o l v i n g i n d i v i d u a l as w e ll as group c o n f l i c t s . This assumption, being n o rm a tiv e , need not be proved e m p i r i c a l l y , but in what f o l lows v a r i o u s j u s t i f i c a t i o n s of t h i s premise w i l l be p res e n ted .
The o th er premise i s of a s o c i o l o g i c a l n a t u r e , i . e . I assume t h a t among d i f f e r e n t n orm ative systems which c o n t r o l b e h a v io u r of i n d i v i d u a l s in a s o c i e t y and a llo w tu q u a l i f y a x i o l o g i c a l l y t h e i r a c t i o n s i t i s the common m o r a l i t y norms t h a t prove to bo the most e f f e c t i v e of a l l . From the v ie w p o in t of the a c t u a l m o t i v a t i o n a l power they a re the norms t h a t p l a y the most s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e in shapin g b e h a v io u rs and which help p a s sin g from the d e c la r e d to the r e a l i z e d v a l u e s .
R e f e r r i n g to the r i c h t r a d i t i o n of e t h i c a l l i t e r a t u r e I le a v e the concept of the common m o r a l i t y a p p lie d here u n d e fin e d . I s h a l l o n ly p o i n t a t two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f e a t u r e s of the c o n s id e re d mora l i t y :
- a v o id i n g extremes in d i c t a t e s and p r o h i b i t i o n s ; f l u c t u a t i n g around the id ea o f " t h e golden mean".
- tendency to b l u r d i s t i n c t d i f f e r e n c e s between moral and ex tra m o r a l norms through j u s t i f y i n g the former by the l a t t e r and v i c e v e r s a .
These two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a l l o w to use the common m o r a l i t y i
concept in i t s i n t u i t i v e meaning .
1 S. W o l f , Moral S a i n t s , " J o u r n a l of P h i lo s o p h y " 1981, Nr .1, P- 6.
I f the presented assumption has been accepted as e m p i r i c a l l y v a l i d , then i t can be claim ed -that i n c l u s i o n of n o n v io le n c e p ro grammes i n t o common m o r a l i t y r e v e a l s to be the f i r s t p r e r e q u i s i t e of t h e i r a c t u a l m o t i v a t i o n a l i n f l u e n c e . Having no fo rm a liz e d c h a r a c t e r , common m o r a l i t y occur^ through c o g n i t i v e and em otional e x p e rie n c e s of men. T h e re fń re these e x p e rie n c e s .must be p r i m a r i l y t a r g e t e d , a f f e c t e d and changed so as to tran sform the norms of non v i o l e n c e programmes i n t o the r u l e s of common m o r a l i t y .
In common con sciou sn ess any r e a l i z a t i o n of a n o n v i o le n t p r o gramme i s a s s o c i a t e d , f i r s t of a l l , w ith moral p e r f e c t i o n which i s a t t a i n a b l e o n ly f o r few. I f for the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e s i n s p i r e d by the C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n Sermon on the Mount i s the most r e p r e s e n t a t i v e then c e r t a i n l y an average C h r i s t i a n does not alw ays f e e l o b lig e d by the d i c t a t e " o f t u r n in g the o th er c h e e k ". For a m a j o r i t y of s o c i a l movements r e f e r r i n g to the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t es the t r a d i t i o n going to Mahatma G a n d h i's id e a s and a c t i o n s i s of c o n s id e r a b le im portance. However, the p o s t u l a t e s of combi ning ahimsa - i . e . n o n v i o le n t f i g h t - w ith a s c e t i c i s m , c e l i b a c y and e n t i r e d e v o tio n to the cause can be found u n i n v i t i n g . These r a d i c a l d i c t a t e s , c e r t a i n l y e a s i e r to accep t w i t h i n the c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n of I n d i a , when t r a n s f e r r e d to the European c u l t u r e could g iv e the im p ression of a s e t of s t r o n g l y exaggerated or even b iz z a r e p o s t u l a t e s .
The p res e n t paper aims a t showing t h a t the p o s t u l a t e s of non v i o l e n c e in s o l v i n g c o n f l i c t s . c a n be t r e a t e d as common m o r a l i t y norms.
I . R e j e c t i o n of Extremes
Programmes r e f e r r i n g to the n o n v io le n c e idea a re numetous and c o n s i d e r a b l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d . N on viole nc e p o s t u l a t e s are p roclaim ed by r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of v a r i o u s r e l i g i o n s as w e l l as by movements and people whose i d e o l o g i c a l programmes renounce any r e l i g i o u s systems. They are announced by advocates of r a d i c a l changes and by c o n s e r v a t i v e s , by r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of p ow e rfu l as well as weak s o c i a l groups. A l l those programmes can be arranged to form a c e r t a i n continuum. Then on i t s one end t h e re w i l l be p ro grammes which t r e a t the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e as an a b s o lu te d e f i n i t e moral im p e r a t i v e , compulsory and im portant f o r i t s own sake.
On the o p p o s ite end o f the continuum th e re w i l l be programmes in which the p o s t u l a t e i s t r e a t e d p u r e ly i n s t r u m e n t a l l y , i . e . those in which u s e fu ln e s s of the p o s t u l a t e i s e stim a te d e x c l u s i v e l y in terms of the p r a g m a t i c a l l y understood e f f e c t i v e n e s s and t h e r e f o r e
• ' * 1
*
e a s i l y r e j e c t a b l e as soon as i t proves u s e l e s s . In accordance w ith the concept of the common m o r a l i t y accepted here the extremes of the programmes continuum should be r e j e c t e d . Two examples of such extreme approaches w i l l be d is c u s s e d below.
I I . Mora l Absolu tis m ( L . Tol s t o y ' s I d e a s )
The c l a s s i c e l example of a b s o l u t i s t i c arguments in fav o u r of n o n v io le n c e are those of L. T o l s t o y ' s . In h i s system the most s i g n i f i c a n t moral norm i s the lo v e p r i n c i p l e . "Love - he wrote - means eagerness of human s o u ls f o r u n i f i c a t i o n and the a c t i v i t y r e s u l t i n g from t h i s u n i f i c a t i o n i s the p rim a ry and the o n ly p r i n c i p l e in l i f e " 2 . This e s s e n t i a l norm of b e ha vio ur i s i d e n t i c a l w it h the norm which makes us r e s ig n from the use of any f o r c e in defense of our r i g h t s or r e a l i z a t i o n of our p la n s . I t i s the a t t i tude of " n o n r e s i s t a n c e " of which T o ls to y says t h a t " . . . i n f a c t i t i s n othin g e l s e but l e a r n i n g and t e a c h in g lo v e not d i s t o r t e d by f a l s e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s " 3. The p o s t u l a t e of n o n r e s i s t a n c e i s - a c c o rd in g to To lsto y - p re s e n t in c o n s c io u s e s s of most of r a t i o n a l i n d i v i d u a l s ; i t was most c l e a r l y form u la te d by J e s u s C h r i s t and came down i n t o C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n . I t h i n k , however, t h a t t h i s p r i n c i p l e can be assig n ed a more u n i v e r s a l meaning, a n i c e r t a i n l y independent of the o f f i c i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the C h r i s t i a n s c i e n c e . T o ls to y assumes t h a t the lo v e p r i n c i p l e i s i n t i m a t e to any human being . I t seems t h a t when T o ls to y speaks of r e l i g i o n he o f t e n means, s i m i l a r l y to Gandhi, a c e r t a i n s t a t e of moral awa ren ess c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of any human i n d i v i d u a l .
Two c o n c lu s i o n s im p ortan t f o r the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of h i s p r i n c i p l e s can be i n f e r r e d from what has been s a i d . F i r s t - the love p r i n c i p l e i s the u n r e s e r v e d ly compulsory and p rim a ry norm of the
Kraków^ 1976,° p . % L ° J ' D° L" i] L l s , y ’ »• '«•
3 I b i d .
human moral b e h a v io u r. Second - the p o s t u l a t e of n o n v io le n c e should not be t r e a t e d as r e s u l t i n g frtom the prim ary norm but as i d e n t i c a l w ith i t in the sense t h a t e v i l done by v i o l e n c e i s e v i l in i t s e l f and not only because i t v i o l a t e s the p r i n c i p l e of lo v e f o r o n e 's neighbour.
I f people usurp the r i g h t of usin g v i o l e n c e , then by t h e i r own deeds they account the very p r i n c i p l e i n s u f f i c i e n t 5 . Con seq uen tly, they deny the p r i n c i p l e of lo v e f o r o n e 's neighbour.
The d i r e c t c l a s h between v i o l e n c e and the p r i n c i p l e of lo v e i s w e l l seen in the fo lo w in g f o r m u la tio n by T o ls t o y . "[•••] the whole h i s t o r y of C h r i s t i a n n a t io n s i s a t a n g i b l e c o n t r a d i c t i o n be tween what they announce and on what they b u i l t t h e i r e x i s t e n c e : a c o n t r a d i c t i o n between the norm of lo v e recognized as the p r i n c i p l e of l i f e and v i o l e n c e reco g nized as n e c e s s i t y and o c c u r in g in v a r
io us forms: as the a u t h o r i t y of r u l e r s , c o u r t s , army e t c . reco g nized and p r a i s e d " 6 .
According to T o ls to y th e re e x i s t s o n ly one p o s s i b l e approach one can take when faced w ith t h i s fundamental c o n t r a d i c t i o n ; the u t t e r submission to the id ea of l o v e , i . e . the a b s o lu te n o n v io le n c e i r r e s p e c t i v e of the consequences to which such an a t t i t u d e can le a d . Ho consequence whatsoever can have the s l i g h t e s t effect on the p o s i t i v e e s t im a t io n of the behavio ur which f o l l o w s the lo v e p r i n c i p l e .
I I I . Extreme In s tru m e n ta lis m ( t h e P r ogramme of the Amer i c a n R e v o l u t i o n )
The r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h i s approach - r e f e r r i n g in a sense to T r o c k i ' s programme - i s M. L e r n e r . He s t a r t s h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w ith p r e s e n t in g h i s d ia g n o s is of the s i t u a t i o n in which the Ameri can s o c i e t y has come to l i v e . He mentions a g r e a t number of " i n s t i t u t i o n a l " forms of v i o l e n c e ^ . V io le n c e i s e x e rte d by a l l na t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s not e x c lu d in g those which seem ingly s e rv e so c i a l needs. V io le n c e l i e s in the i n t e r e s t of the r u l i n g c l a s s . I t
5 See i b i d .
C
I b i d .~
M. L e r n e r , V io le nce , and R e v o l u t i o n , [ i n : ] E t h i c s ini s d i s p l a y e d , among o t h e r s , in u n e q u a l i t y of p o s i t i o n , s t a t u s , p r e r o g a t i v e s , and adventages. American r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s d e c l a r e to change t h i s s i t u a t i o n . They aim at c r e a t i n g a s o c i e t y in which v i o l e n c e , rac ism , h a t r e d , and e x p l o i t a t i o n in any form would be a b sen t, and moreover, they would wish to a c h ie v e t h i s aim w ith o u t having to turn to v i o l e n c e .
"The r e v o l u t i o n a r y h ates v i o l e n c e and h ate s to see in nocent О
people k i l l e d " - w r i t e s L e r n e r . But e v e r y t h i n g shows t h a t the use of the r u l i n g c l a e s which i s unable to r e s ig n from i t s p r i v i l a g e s . "The r e v o l u t i o n a r y must alw ays be in fu s e d w ith love and re s p e c t foe human l i f e . I t i s t h i s v e ry lo v e f o r human l i f e th a t f o r c e s a r e v o l u t i o n a r y to. r e s o r t to s e l f - d e f e n s i v e , i . e . r e v o l u t i o n a r y , v i o l e n c e " 9 .
The r e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t i o n • i s not p o s s i b l e at the moment. I t has no chance of success because the c o s c io u s n e s s of a g r e a t p a r t of the s o c i e t y i s s t i l l unprepared to a c c e p t r e v o l u t i o n a r y changos due to the lo n g - l a s t i n g p re s s u re exortnd by the r u l i n g c l a s s . I t i s n e c e s sa ry to make people aware t h a t r e v o l u t i o n a r y v i o l e n c e Í3 in d is p e n s a b le f o r g a in in g independence. Го change the s t a t e of comm on awareness r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s should adopt only such methods of fight which would not evoke an immediate h o s t i l e r e a c t i o n of the so c i e t y . This method i s n o n v i o le n c e . " I t i s my assessment of the p res e n t p e rio d - says L e r n e r - t h a t the r e v o l u t i o n a r y movement should r e l y p r i m a r i l y on a s t r a t e g y of n o n v io le n c e prob ab ly a t least f o r the next ten y e a r s ' ' 1^. N o n v io le n t a c t i o n s should change s o c i a l a s s o c i a t i o n s i d e n t i f y i n g the r e v o l u t i o n a r y movement w ith a s u p e r f i c i a l image of v i o l e n c e . The s o c i e t y should be made to r e a l i z e t h a t a r e a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y v i o l e n c e c o n s i s t s in something q u i t e e l s e . L e r n e r continues.- "Huople must be prepared f o r the fact, t h a t the r u l i n g c l a s s has i t in i t s power to make the r e v o l u t i o n in t h i s c o u n try bloody and v i o l e n t . And they must l e a r n t h a t we do not welcome v i o l e n c e and t h a t the o n ly way to a v o id v i o l e n c e i s f o r enough people to move d e c i s i v e l y to the s id e of the r e v o l u t i o n “ 11. To a c h i e v e t h i s purpose "a t a c t i c a l use of n o n v i o l e n c e ”
8 I b i d . , p. 271. 9 I b i d . , p, 270. 10 I b i d . , p. 271. 11 I b i d . , p. 271.
- as the author says - might be h e l p f u l . "N o n v io le n c e should be
• 12
adopted by the movement f o r r e v o l u t i o n a r y change as a t a c t i c " A f t e r such a statem ent the c o n f e s s io n " i t would be both d isho ne st and unwise to pretend t h a t we are n o n v i o le n t in’ p r i n c i p l e " 1^ -sounds e n t i r e l y c o n v in c in g .
N o n v io le n t a c t i o n s proposed by L e a r n e r are m ainly to be mass a c t i o n s , s in c e a c t i o n s undertaken by i n d i v i d u a l can le a d to i n d i v i d u a l r e p r e s s i o n s . This a p p l i e s a l s o to s i t u a t i o n s in which un dergoing a r r e s t might s e r v e the purpose of e x h i b i t i n g the s tr e n g t h of o n e 's b e l i e f s . In t h i s type of b e h a v io u r the author sees a chance to move and g ain s o c i a l o p i n io n , but he adds t h a t from s t r a t e g i c a l p o in t of view the r e s u l t i s not worth the p r i c e of lo s i n g o n e 's freedom.
I V . Mo r a l and E x tram o ra l J u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r N on violenc e Programmes
In common m o r a l i t y - s i m i l a r l y to what can be found in some e t h i c a l t h e o r i e s , f o r in s t a n c e in u t i l i t a r i s m - moral norms and v a lu e s are o fte n j u s t i f i e d w it h e x tra m o ra l arguments. Even i f in f a c t such an argument i s not e x p l i c i t l y pronounced:, a p o s s i b i l i t y of i t s use i s p o s t u l a t e d . Any la c k of such a p o s s i b i l i t y i s t r e a t e d as a sympton of moral f a n a tis m . Con seq uen tly, from the p o i n t of view of common m o r a l i t y o n ly such n o n v io le n c e programmes seem a t t r a c t i v e which not o n ly show p o t e n t i a l i t i e s in r e a l i z i n g e x tra m o ra l v a lu e s but a l s o e x p l i c i t l y r e f e r to those v a l u e s .
In the broad v a r i e t y of n o n v io le n c e programmes - which s t i l l remains broad a f t e r e l i m i n a t i o n of extreme f o r m u la tio n s - one may f i n d examples of a c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of emphasis put on t h e i r moral and e x tra m o ra l g o a ls .
V. M o ral- p rag m atic Programmes
Among the programmes in which moral a sp ect of n o n v io le n c e i s most s t r o n g l y emphasized the u n q u e s tio n a b ly h ig h e s t p o s i t i o n i s ad m itt e d to G a n d h i's i d e a s . T h e ir moral v a lu e comes, to a g r e a t e x t e n t , from a r e l i g i o u s c o n tex t in which Gandhi p la c e s h ie non- v j o l e n c e p o s t u l a t e . He i d e n t i f i e s i t w ith ahimsa, one of the prin
c i p a l v a lu e s of the Hindu e t h i c a l t r a d i t i o n . He speaks of “ the r i g h t to n o n v i o le n c e " which he a s s o c i a t e s w ith "dharm a"14. In one of h i s w r i t i n g s he quotes two fragments from t e l i g i o u s Hindu books and t r e a t s the thoughts in c lu d e d in t h e re as s u b s t a n t i a l i n s p i r a t i o n s f o r h i s own b e l i e f s .
These thoughts are fo rm u lated as f o l l o w s : "Ahimsa i s the utmost (supreme) r i g h t , i . e . dharma. С---] "The re i s no o th e r r i g h t or dharma but T r u t h " 1^.
The word "dharma" has a l o t of meanings, but in th s sense g i ven to i t by Gandhi i t f i r s t of a l l теапз d u ty , p rop e r b e h a v io u r , o b l i g a t i o n stemming from the r e l i g i o n 16. With t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of dharma p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of ahimsa becomes the p rim a ry r e l i g i o u s duty of en i n d i v i d u a l . Being aware of the f i n a l aim of •the human l i f e d e fin e d as " r e a l i z a t i o n of God who l i v e s in u s" and t r e a t i n g the n a tu re of the U n iv e r s e as the u n i t y of a l l t h a t exist and f i n d i n g God's presence in a l l t h a t l i v e , one c o n s e q u e n tly a r r i v e s a t a g iv e n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the r i g h t to n o n v i o l e n c e 17. In the case d is c u s s e d , t h i s r i g h t i s t r e a t e d as one of the fundamen t a l moral norms j u s t i f i e d by r e l i g i o u s o b l i g a t i o n s . Any b ehavio ur t h a t v i o l a t e s the n o n v i o le n c e p o s t u l a t e , any o p p o s itio n to the p r i n c i p l e s of ahisma p r e v e n t s s e l f - r e a l i z a t i o n of a human being s in c e i t means v i o l a t i o n of the u n i t y of the U n i v e r s e , of the p r i m i t i v e bonds between man, world and God.
A ccording to Gandhi, in the c o n d i t i o n s of v i o l e n c e the i n d i v i d u a l i s unable to r e a l i z e h i s own s p e c i f i c n a t u r e and consequ e n t l y , he becomes more and more b r u t a l . At the same time v i o l e n c e becomes a s e l f - d r i v e n f o r c e q u i t e independent o f i n t e n t i o n s oi the s id e s of c o n f l i c t , which f i n a l l y r e s u l t s i n i t s e x p a n s i b i l i t y and then complete u n c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y . In view of t h i s , one should r e nounce v i o l e n c e not o n ly because i t i s m o r a lly i l l but a l s o be cause - as Gandhi b e l i e v e s - i t appears to be i n e f f e c t i v e in g a i n ing alms which in common awareness a re a s s o c i a t e d w it h i t s a p p l i c a t i o n . This concerns s i t u a t i o n s in which v i o l e n c e i s to be used
14 G. P o n t a r a, The R e j e c t i o n of V i o le n c e i n Gandhian E t h i c of C o n f l i c t R e s o l u t i o n , " J o u r n a l of Peace R e s e a r c h " 1965, V o l. 2, Nr 3, p. 201. 15 I b i d . , p. 202. 16 I b i d . 17 I b i d . , p. 203.
in a c o u n t e r a t t a c k as w e l l as those in which i t i s to be merely a d e v ic e used to e l i m i t a t e s o c i a l i n j u s t i c e . S in c e v i o l e n c e proves to be not o n ly e v i l but a l s o i n e f f e c t i v e , i t becomes obvious t h a t some o th e r e f f e c t i v e method must be employed. Th is requirem ent seems to be an immediate consequence of G a n d h i's a c t i v i s t i c a ttitu d e depending on c o u n t e r a c t i o n a g a i n s t p a s s i v e n e s s . This method, a to o l
to a c h ie v e g iv e n aims, i s " t i g h t w ith o u t f i g h t " , b ro a d ly meant as a p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of ahimse* Gandhi s t r o n g l y b e l i e v e d t h a t w it h the help of ahimsa, the b e s t , n e v e r - f a i l i n g d e v ic e and the
1 f
i
g r e a t e s t power, any worthy and v a l u a b l e goal could be achievedR e c o g n itio n of ahimsa as an e f f e c t i v e s t r a t e g y d id not e n t i r e ly s e t t l e the q u e s tio n of a goal f o r which i t was to be employed. Only one t h in g was obvious - the goal was m o r a lly r i g h t . I b e l i e v e Gandhi was convinced t h a t h i s method could not be used in ord e r to r e a l i s e wrong aims. A c t in g in the way in fu s e d w it h moral v a lu e s people cannot t r y to a t t a i n v i l e g o a ls . F i r s t of a l l , because the f o l l o w e r s of ahimsa cannot have iq n o b le i n t e n t i o n s . I f an i n d i v i d u al proved to have d is h o n o u ra b le i n t e n t i o n s , he would not be a f o l l o w e r of ahimsa. Second, a l s o o b j e c t i v e l y , i . e . in d ep en d en tly of i n t e n t i o n s , a c t i n g a c c o rd in g to ahimsa cannot b r in g blameworthy outcomes. A p p l i c a t i o n of ahimsa - in d e p e n d e n tly of : e . c o n c r e t e goal - which i t s e r v e s as a to o l or a method - alw ays le a d s to some a d d it o n a l r e s u l t s perm anently connected w ith • submission -to the p r i n c i p l e s of ahimsa. Those r e s u l t s , though i n c i d e n t a l from the p o i n t of view o f the c o n c r e t e goal r e a l i z e d , are e s s e n t i a l from the v ie w p o in t of a l l the v a lu e s o f G a n d h i's e t h i c s , as they c o n s t i t u t e s i g n i f i c a n t s te p s towards:
- r e d u c t i o n of v i o l e n c e ,
- moral s t r e n g t h e n in g and s u b lim a t io n of man,
- r e v i v a l and s t r e n g t h e n in g of d e m o c ra tic v a lu e s and democra t i c s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s .
I f we assume t h a t f o l l o w i n g ahimsa must alw ays have a t l e a s t such consequences as the t h r e e e n l i s t e d above, then in no case i t s use can s e rv e bad g o a ls . Th is i s in f u l l accordance w ith the f o l l o w i n g statem ent by Gandhi: " P e o p le s a y: means are nothing more but j u s t means, and I s a y: means are e v e r y t h i n g . L i k e means l i k e achievem ents 1,9
18
See I . L a z a r i - P a w ł o w s k a , E t y k a Gandhiego, Warszawa 1965, p. 79.
I f we c o n s id e r the th r e e types of phenomena r e a l i z e d through ahimsa m o r a lly v a l u a b l e - on the grounds of the s tan d ard s accepted by Gandhi and p r e s e n t in many o th er e t h i c a l systems - then we can c la im t h a t employment of ahimsa le a d s to g o a ls which are m o r a lly v a l u a b l e . C on se q ue n tly, we can form u la te a t h e s i s about a double source of moral v a lu e of n o n v i o le n t method-* , in f i g h t in G a n d h i's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . On the one hand, a f i g h t c a r r i e d out w it h n o n v io l e n t methods i s a l r e a d y in i t s e l f a v a l u e . On the o t h e r hand, the v e ry d e c i s i o n not to use v i o l e n c e i s m o r a lly good because i t i s e f f e c t i v e in a t t a i n i n g g o a ls recognized as good. We can t h e r e f o r e speak about a double v a lu e of n o n v i o le n t methods.
I t corresponds w ith what M. L . King w ro te : " I have become con v in c e d t.hat t h i s i s the on ly e f f e c t i v e method a v a i l a b l e f o r the opressed in t h e i r f i g h t f o r freedom, which does not evoke moral
20
r e s e r v a z i o n s . In t h i s approach v i o l e n c e a p p lie d to r e a l i z e even accepted g o a ls g iv e s r i s e to moral o b j e c t i o n s , and thus a lr e a d y the d e c i s i o n not to use v i o l e n c e becomes a c e r t a i n v a lu e . I f the r e j e c t i o n of v i o l e n c e may s e rv e good g o a l s , then n o n v io le n c e gains an a d d i t i o n a l v a l u e . I t was emphasized by King when he wrote: " C h r i s t fu r n is h e d the s p i r i t and m o t iv a tio n w h i le Gandhi fu r n is h e d
21
the m e t h o d " . The n o n v i o le n t method i s t r e a t e d here as good be cause i t f i t s in w ith C h r i s t ' s t e a c h in g and moreover i t can s e r v e e f f e c t i v e l y the v a lu e s preached by t h a t te a c h in g .
The use of n o n v i o l e n t methods i s to lead to g o a ls of ro u g h ly speaking - two k i n d s . The f i r s t kin d o f g o a ls i s , so to speak, i n s e p a r a b l y a s s o c i a t e d w ith the s t r a t e g y of n o n v io le n c e and r e f e r s to the th re e typ es of consequenses d is c u s s e d above. The second k ind of g o a ls r e f e r s to c o n c r e t e purposed f o r which a g iven n o n v i o l e n t a c t i o n i s undertaken, f o r i n s t a n c e - a b o l i t i o n of s a l t a c t in I n d i a or c a n c e l l a t i o n of r a c i a l s e g r e g a tio n in the buses of Montgomery. Thus we can speak of two a s p e c ts of e f f e c t i v e ness of such a c t i o n s . The f i r s t r e f e r s to the g o a ls i n h e r e n t in the s o c i a l f u n c t i o n i n g of ahisma. The second - i n v o l v e s c o n c r e t e g o a ls c f a g iv e n a c t i o n . The q u e s tio n a r i s e s which of the two
ГЛ Л
M. L. K i n g , Moja droga do w a lk i bez g w a łtu , [w :] I L a- • z a r i - P a w ł o w s k a , Gandhi, Warszawa 1967, p. 2C6.
9 1
M. L. K i n g , P ilg r im a g e to N on -V io len ce, [ i n : ] The C h r i s t i a n Century A p r i l 13 1960, [ i n : ] The P a c i f i s t C o n sc ie n c e , ed. by P. M a y e r , A. G a t e w a y , E d i t i o n Chicago 1967, p. 406.
a sp ects i s meant when speaking of e f f e c t i v e n e s s of n o n v i o le n t methods. At the f i r s t s i g h t one could say t h a t when Gandhi s t a t e s t h a t no s i n g l e case has been known to him in which ahimsa f a i l e d or when he recommends common adherence to i t i r r e s p e c t i v e of a s i t u a t i o n or c irc u m s ta n c e s he means f i r s t of a l l the f i r s t aspect of e f f e c t i v e n e s s 22.
L e t us r e c a l l t h a t when the problem of defence a g a i n s t the J a panese was c o n s id e re d Gandhi a d v is ed the use of n o n v i o le n t methods even i f they were to lead to the d e fe n d e rs ' death. "Honourable" death was then t r e a t e d as the j u s t i f i c a t i o n of n o n v i o le n t a c t i o n a s s o c i a t e d w ith e f f e c t i v e n e s s of ahimsa. The same idea i s - I think - p r e s e n t in the f o l l o w i n g s ta tem e n t: "The German Jews w i l l win a l a s t i n g v i c t o r y over the German Not-Jews as they c o n v e r t the l a t t e r to the r e s p e c t in g of human d i g n i t y " 23. C o n sid e rin g the h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s we have e v e ry reason fo r s u s p e c tin g th a t was meant to happen a lr e a d y a f t e r t h e i r death.
I f we assume th a t in the f i r s t s i t u a t i o n the goal was to de fend independence and in the second to save the l i v e s of German J e w s , then none of those g o a ls was a c h ie v e d by n p n v io le n t meth ods. I t seems t h a t Gandhi q u i t e konwingly a llo w ed such a p o s s i b i l i t y . What was to be r e a l i z e d were some g o a ls from w i t h i n the group d e fin e d above as in s e p a r a b ly a s s o c i a t e d w ith the use of non v i o l e n t methods in f i g h t .
I . Pawłowska n o t i c e s t h a t Gandhi uses the term " v i c t o r y " a ls o when n othing e l s e but moral v a lu e s have been p r e s e r v e d 2^. In the f i r s t of our examples those v a lu e s woulo be s e l f - f a i t h f u l n e e s and honourable d e a th . The second example i l l u s t r a t e s s t i l l more. Moral s tr e n g t h e n in g c f the man a c t i n g w ith n o n v i o le n t methods c o v e rs a ls o h i s a n t a g o n is t (m oral s u b lim a t io n of the a n t a g o n i s t ) . I t seems t h a t t h i s i s j u s t t h i s v e ry aspect of g o a ls of n o n v i o l e n t a c t i o n s and t h i s sense of . e f f e c t i v e n e s s of such a c t i o n s th a t Gandhi had in mind. I am a ls o sure t h a t in the two cases d is c u s s e d here Gan dhi assumed e x is te n c e of a p o s i t i v e aim in the form of red u c t i o n of a t o t a l amount of v i o l e n c e , i . e . one more aim i n s e p a r a b le
22
See M. G a n d h i , To E v e r y B r i t o n , 1938, quoted a-fter l a z a r i - P a w ł o w s k a , E t y k a . . . , p. 82.
23
M. G a n d h i , Zionism and A n ti s e m itis m , 1938, quoted a f t e r L a z a r i - P a w ł o w s k a , E t y k a . . . , p. 89.
24
from the method proposed by him. The im portance a ssigned by him to moral v i c t o r y r e s u l t e d in a c e r t a i n •m isapprehension of h i s non v i o l e n t r e s i s t e n c e and n o n r e s i s t e n c e w ith a strong emphasis put on the moral s i g n i f i c a n c e of the n o n r e s i s t a n c e a c t . A ccording to R. Niebuhr i t i s Gandhi h i m s e l f , " th e g r e a t e s t contemporary r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of n o n v i o le n c e , who i s to be blamed f o r t h i s c o n f u s io n . He o f t e n used to speak of t h i s method as of the use of the power of s p i r i t or the power of t r u t h . He t r e a t e d those powers as s p i r i t u a l in o p p o s itio n to a p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r of v i o l e n c e " 2'’ .
Keeping in mind the p o s t u l a t e of a c t i v i t y p res e n t in G a n d h i's e t h i c a l system we can have no doubt t h a t h i s r e f e r e n c e to the po wers of s p i r i t and t r u t h must not be i d e n t i f i e d w ith u n w i l l i n gness to i n f l u e n c e domains o th er than m eta p h y s ic a l or p s y c h o l o g i c a l . H is n o n r e s i s t a n c e in which th e re are t r a c e s of the C h r i s t i a n and Je w is h t r a d i t i o n demanded p a s s iv e n e s s in the face of an e x t e r n a l l y s tr o n g e r enemy. This a t t i t u d e i n v o lv e d re a d in e s s to s u f f e r , s e l f - d e v o t i o n , s e l f - f a i t h f u l n e s s , l o y a l t y to o n e 's own b e l i e f s , w h i le any o b j e c t i v e change was supposed to be p o s s i b l e o n ly due to s u p e r n a tu r a l powers.
However, G a n d h i's e s t i m a t i o n of e f f e c t i v e n e s s of ahimsa c e r t a i n l y went beyond the l i m i t s mentioned here and covered the
q u e
-s t i o n o f -succe-s-s in g a in in g c o n c r e t e g o a ls . Gandhi ad m itted t h a t th e re had been s i t u a t i o n s in which ahimsa had f a i l e d . From a l l t h a t have been s a id above i t can e a s i l y be concluded th a t ahimsa could never happen to f a i l in r e a l i z i n g g e n e ra l aims i n s e p a r a b ly a s s o c i a t e d w ith i t . Thus the o n ly domain in which i t cou ld was t h a t of c a s u a l c o n c r e t e g o a ls .The i n t e r n a t i o n a l co n fe re n c e of South-American bishops held under the motto " E v a n g e l i c n o n v io le n c e - l i b e r a t i o n power" passed a p ro c la m a tio n of a p p ly in g n o n v i o l e n t methods of f i g h t in t h e i r c o u n t r i e s . The p r o c la m a tio n , c a l l e d N on viole nc e Movement C h a r t e r , has been grounded on the C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n but w i t h i n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n very c l o s e to the views of Dom H e ld er Camara - the f i r s t to prooagate n o n v i o l e n t methods in South Am erica26. Under t h i s
in-25
R. N i e b u h r , Moral Man and Immoral S o c i e t y , Ch. S c r i - . r e r s Sons, New York 1960, p. 242.
26
La C a rte de La Non-Violence L a t i o n o - A m e r i c a i n e , " C a h i e r s de l a R e c o n c i l i a t i o n " 1978, Nr 5.
t e r p r e t a t ł o n s o c i a l j u s t i c e becomes one of the c r u c i a l C h r i s t i a n v a l u e s . R u le r s and governments deserve moral ap p ro val and support of the c o n g reg a tio n p rovid e d they a c t a c c o rd in g to the j u s t i c e p r i n c i p l e . In C h r i s t i a n s c ie n c e v i o l e n c e i s not an acceptab l e method to r e a l i z e t h i s p r i n c i p l e . But v i o l e n c e a p p lie d by go vernments to p r e s e rv e systems which a re c l e a r l y u n j u s t must be s u b j e c t to a s p e c i a l l y s tro n g moral d i s a p p r o v a l .
Condemnation of i n j u s t i c e and renouncement of v i o l e n c e b r in g forward the q u es tio n of the forms of a c t i n g accepted by the C h r i s t i a n e t h i c s as i n t e r p r e t e d by the autho rs of the document d i s c u s sed. These forms are n o n v i o le n t a c t i o n s . But the n o n v io le n c e prin c i p l e i s not t r e a t e d here as a mere d e v i c e . "N o n v io le n t a c t i o n s a re both an idea and a method. [ . . .J We f i n d our f a i t h in the words and a c t i o n s of J e s u s C h r i s t . There we d i s c o v e r deep m o tiv a t i o n and c l e a r examples of how to l i v e making use of the n o n v io l e n c e p r i n c i p l e s . A n o n v i o l e n t a c t i o n i s the embodiment of evan g e l i c form of l i f e in c o n f r o n t a t i o n w ith a l l forms of i n j u s t i c e of t h i s w o r l d " 27.
The a utho rs of the document s t r e s s t h a t n o n v i o l e n t a c t i o n s are not a spontaneous and i n s t i n c t i v e r e a c t i o n a g á tn e t imminence and v i o l e n c e . The d e c i s i o n to f o l l o w t h i s way of behaving i s d i f f i c u l t , r e q u i r e s courage and makes one reach as f o r as the d ee p e s t l a y e r s of p e r s o n a l i t y . B a sin g on accep tan ce of o n e 's own i n ner freedom and moral r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r o n e 's own l i f e man i s
a b le to oppose i n j u s t i c e w ith p u t t u r n in g to v i o l e n c e . I t demands s t r e n g t h and courage. "The s p i r i t of r e c o n c i l i a t i o n can never be
T 28
born out of weakness and meanness"
R e f e r r i n g to the q u o t a t io n above i t can be observed t h a t w h ile the n o n v io le n c e c on ceived as an id ea r e q u i r e s moral m a t u r i t y and c o n c e n t r a t i o n on in n e r moral v a l u e s , the n o n v io le n c e taken as
a
method needs r e f e r e n c e to o n e 's konwledge of s o c i a l and p o l i . i c a l r e l a t i o n s . In n o n v i o le n t a c t i n g " s o c i a l a n a l y s i s i s never r e j e c t e d , on the c o n t r a r y , i t i s found in d i s p e n s a b l e to grasp r e a l problems, i n d i c a t i o n s of i n j u s t i c e to g e th e r w ith t h e i r grounds
29 and v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s "
27 I b i d . , p. 19. 20 I b i d . , p. 20. 29 I b i d . , p. 21.
Although the c h a r t e r d is c u s s e d above i s a document passed by the c o n feren c e of e c c l e s i a s t i c person s, i t f u l l y a llo w s a p o s s i b i l i t y of m o t iv a t io n s d i f f e r e n t from the C h r i s t i a n ones in under t a k in g n o n v i o le n t a c t i o n s . I t i s p o s s i b l e to t r e a t the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e both as a v a lu e in i t s e l f and as a méttiod f o r f i g h t i n g i n j u s t i c e .
In the approach of Gandhi and t h a t of the American bishops au- t o t e l l i c v a lu e s of n o n v i o l e n t methods were complemented w ith i n s tru m e n ta l ones. However, th e re are a u t h o rs , coming from the c l o s e s t c i r c l e s of the main r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a lr e a d y d is c u s s e d , who used to put a c o n s i d e r a b l y s tr o n g e r s t r e s s on e f f e c t i v e n e s s of those methods in a t t a i n i n g c o n c r e t e g o a ls .
W r i t i n g on n o n v io le n c e in the f i g h t a g a in s t r a c i a l s e g r e g a tio n W. R. M i l l e r s a y s : i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s , however, i s not a q u es tio n of w i s h f u l t h i n k i n g but of hard f a c t s " 30. J . Nehru, whose f a v o u r a b le a t t i t u d e to Gandhi a r i s e s no doubt, s t r o n g l y c r i t i c i z e d o th e r than in s t r u m e n ta l tre a tm e n t of n o n v i o l e n t methods. I t becomes c l e a r from h i s words: "We took to the n o n v i o le n t method ( f i f t e e n y e a rs ago) because i t promised to take us to our goal in the most d e s i r a b l e and e f f e c t i v e way. The goal was then a p a r t from n o n v io le n c e ; i t was not mere appendage or outcome of i t . No one could have s a i d then t h a t freedom or independence must o n ly be aimed at i f they are a t t a i n a b l e by n o n v i o l e n t means. But now our g o a ls i t s e l f i s judged in terms of n o n v io le n c e and r e j e c t e d i f i t does not seem to f i t in w ith i t . The idea of n o n v io le n c e i s thus becoming an i n f l e x i b l e dogma which may not be c h a l le n g e d . As such i t i s l o s in g i t s s p i r i t u a l appeal to the i n t e l e c t , and t a k in g i t s p la c e in the p igeon-hole of f a i t h and r e l i g i o n " 3^-.
When i n t e r p r e t e d in terms of p syc hology the above statem ent shows how those j o i n i n g G a n d h i's movement were m o tiv a te d . This could be of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t f o r those who are engaged in the
30 W. R. M i l l e r , Non-Violence i n the American R a c i a l C ri s i s , Gandhi Morg Jan/1965, [ i n : ] L a z a r i - P a w ł o w s k a , E t y k a . . . , p. 213.
31 J . N e h r u , An A u to b ig r a p h y , A l l i e d P u b l i s h e r s P r i v a t e L t d . Bombay, New D e l h i , C a l c u t e , Madras 1962, p. 547.
study of the h i s t o r y of n o n v io le n c e movements. Which seems impor t a n t i s g i v i n g a d e f i n i t e p r i o r i t y to those g oals which r e l a t e to e x tra m o ra l v a l u e s , freedom and independence. G a n d h i's b e l i e f t h a t the type and the jmoral v a lu e of the means used s e t t l e the que s t i o n of what goal - in the sense of i t s moral v a lu e - w i l l be a c h ie v e i s e x p l i c i t l y r e j e c t e d here.
In c e r t a i n s p e c i a l s i t u a t i o n s a v i o l e n t a c t i o n can sometimes happen to lead to m o r a lly good r e s u l t s which a c t u a l l y need not be i n v o l v e d in a g iven moral system; i t may be s u f f i c i e n t i f they can be q u a l i f i e d as good as w i t h i n the system. C on seq uen tly, the n e c e s s i t y to apply a method oth er than a n o n v i o le n t one does not im m ediately lead to moral c o n f l i c t , because then the v a lu e of the means used becomes d e f i n i t e l y determined by the moral v a lu e of the accepted g o a l. Any doubts t h a t can a r i s e in t h a t s i t u a t i o n are recognized by Nehru as r e s u l t i n g from adoption of an i n f l e x i b le dogma. The p o s i t i o n which under a w e lld is p o s e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n cou ld be d e fin e d as s e l f - f a i t h f u l n e s s and l o y a l t y to o n e 's i d e a l s , does not meet a ccep tan ce h e re .
We must remember t h a t t h i s t e l e o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of non v i o l e n c e was g iv e n by the man who, in s p i t e of' h i s r a t i o n a l i s m so w e l l seen i n the paragraph c i t e d above, b e l i e v e d d eep ly in moral v a l u e s of ahimsa. He w ro te : "What I have s t r o n g l y admired i s the
32
moral as p ec t of our movement and s a ty a q ra h a a c t i o n " . However, h i s em o tional a t t i t u d e to n o n v io le n c e has not a f f e c t e d h i s reason ing in which in s t r u m e n ta l e v a l u a t i o n remains predominant.
O n e
more remark seems in order h e r e . When a n a ly z in g N eh ru 's views to i l l u s t r a t e e x tra m o ra l j u s t i f i c a t i o n of n o n v io le n c e I have presumed t h a t such v a lu e as the independence of I n d i a was f o r him of p u r e l y p o l i t i c a l c h a r a c t e r . I t was not in c lu d e d in h i s e t h i c a l system, i . e . i t was an e x t r a e t h i c a l and ex tra m ora l v a lu e . My s u p p o s it io n has been based on the statem e nts c i t e d above which co n firm moral i n t e r r e l a t i o n ? , between G a n d h i's and N e h ru 's a t t i tu d e s. I th in k t h a t i f e s s e n t i a l elements of t h e i r moral p o s i t i o n s were s i m i l a r , the assumption has been w e l l - j u s t i f i e d .The views analogous to those r e p re s e n te d by Nehru a re ahared by D. Lund, one of the le a d in g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of n o n r e s i s t a n c e movement in Norway d u rin g World War I I . The v a lu e which i s e x t e r n al towards m o r a l i t y i s the r u l e s g overning d e m o cra tic s o c i e t i e s .
J О
The most e s s e n t i a l th in g t h a t should be done by the p a c i f i s t i s to make people r e a l i z e s u p e r i o r i t y of fundamental d e m o cra tic r u l e s ove r p o l i t i c a l systems. Th is e s t i m a t i o n i s grounded on a c e r t a i n q u a s i- e m p ir ic a l t h e s i s w hich, 1 suppose, does not belong to Lund's moral system. He w r i t e s : "(One must be aware of the f a c t ) th a t the l i f e of the i n d i v i d u a l can be most f u l l y and d eep ly developed in a d em o cratic s o c i e t y " 33.
On the o th e r hand, the p o s t u l a t e of n o n v io le n c e i s i n c lu d e d , as I t h i n k , in the e t h i c a l system of the a u th o r, s in c e i t can be j u s t i f i e d w i t h i n the system by a r e f e r e n c e to the m eta p h y s ic a l c o n c e p tio n of the e x i s t e n c e " o f the image of Cod in e v e ry human b e i n g " 34.
At the same tim e, however, no m e ta p h y s ic a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n can be found f o r h i s making the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e .-iííig a to ry or using i t in g iven c ir c u m s ta n c e s as a means of a c t i o n . Lund r e - ' marks: "A g r e a t m a j o r i t y of our people turned to n o n v io le n c e be cause they f e l t t h a t f o r a sm all c o u n try t h a t was the o n ly e f f e c - t t v e method of f i g h t a g a in s t a much s t r o n g e r fer.ewy. In our case n o n v io le n c e was not a v o l u n t a r y c h o ic e of the kind th a t a 3trong
country côn a f f o r d in i t s s t r u g g l e a g a in s t a week o n e "35. Thus the d e c i s i o n to use n o n v i o l e n t methods need not r e s u l t from s tro n g b e l i e f in t h e i r moral s u p p e r i o r i t y or g r e a t e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s . I t can be a sim ple consequence of some u n a v o id a b le s i t u a t i o n in which no oth er' methods can be used to defend v a lu e s and t h in g s accepted as r i g h t .
D is c u s s in g Lund we should r e c a l l G a n d h i's s tatem ent in which he says t h a t the n o n v i o l e n t method i s only f o r the s tr o n g , and that i t can never be a ff o r d e d by the weak. I t i s obvious t h a t speaking of s t r e n g t h Gandhi means moral v a lu e s whereas Lund a p p a r e n t ly r e f e r s to p h y s i c a l s t r e n g t h . I t i s worth emphasizing t h a t f o r Can- dhi the d e c i s i o n to use n o n v i o l e n t methods when no o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t s cannot be co n s id e re d a. moral d e c i s i o n . But i t Паз a p o s i t i v e moral v a lu e f o r both Gandhi and Lund.
33 D. H. L u n d , P a c i f i s m under O ccu p a tio n , [w :j P a c i f i s t C on scie n ce, ed. by P. M а у e r , A. Gateway E d i t i o n , Chicago 1967, p. 355.
34 See i b i d . , p. 356. 35 I b i d .
V I I . C on clusion s
I b e l i e v e th a t the a n a l y s t s p resented has been s u c c e s s f u l in showing t h a t the programmes p o s t u l a t i n g • n o n v io le n c e in s o l v i n g c o n f l i c t s or in d efence of. r i g h t cause can be .formulated in » moderate way and thus a v o id being blamed f o r fa n a tis m on the one hnnd and f o r pure and not q u i t e moral pragmatism on the o t h e r .
R e j e c t i o n of both a b s o l u t i s t i c as w e l l as e x tre m ely instrumen- t a l i s t i c v e r s i o n s of the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e a llo w ed to e x h i b i t moral v a lu e s of the id ea of n o n v i o l e n t f i g h t . In the programmes in which t h e i r pragm atic v a lu e was emphasized, the n o n v io le n c e idea was a s s o c ia t e d w ith v a r i o u s e x tra m o ra l v a l u e s . I f so, then th e re are no o b s t a c l e s to ac c e p t the p o s t u l a t e s of n o n v io le n c e p r o g r a mmes as common m o r a l i t y погтз and to enjoy s o c i a l b e n e f i t s coming from t h i s f a c t . The advantages of in c l u d i n g n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e s in the common m o r a l i t y were p o in ted out in the i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h i s paper.
To conclude our d is c u s s i o n one more problem should be mentioned. Common m o r a l i t y norms are u s u a l l y t r e a t e d as statem e nts which, a p a r t from t h e i r n orm ative con ten t i n v o l v e a c e r t a i n d e s c r i p t i v e e- lement con ce rn ing e m p i r i c a l r e l a t i o n s ( b e t t e r or worse j u s t i f i e d , t r u e or f a l s e ) between v a r i o u s phenomena. For a norm to be popu l a r and b ro a d ly accepted i t seems more im portant t h a t i t s assum p t io n s be p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y a t t r a c t i v e than t r u e .
In n o n v io le n c e programmes' such assumptions a re g r e a t in number. They r e l a t e to nonviolent- a c t i o n s and t h e i r e f f e c t on psyche of the a c t i n g person and h i s a n t a g o n i s t , on the awareness of the enemy, the outcomes of n o n v io le n c e i n p u b l i c and i n d i v i d u a l a c t i v i t i e s , in thę f u n c t i o n i n g of p o l i t i c a l mechanisms, and so on, and so f o r t h . One of the b r o a d ly accepted assumptions concerns b e l i e f i n p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e s of human n a tu re and i t s moral s e n s i b i l i t y . C onsequently i t i s assumed t h a t the p r e s s u r e of n o n v i o l e n t a c t io n e x e rte d on the opponent w i l l tu rn out e f f e c t i v e .
Such assumptions s t r e s s i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s of proposed methods can appeal to people and help in g a in in g f o l l o w e r s , but may turn out to be d i s a s t r o u s f o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s of undertaken actions- i f the assumptions prove f a l s e from the e m p i r i c a l v ie w p o i n t .
Ooubts as to e m p i r i c a l fo u n d a tio n s of the assumptions mentioned above b r in g to l i g h t a c o n f l i c t between p e r s u a s i v e a t t r a c t i o n
o f announcements and t h e i r e m p i r i c a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n shapin g
so-,
tc i a l r e a l i t y . I f the n o n v io le n c e p o s t u l a t e i s to be t r e a t e d as the common m o r a l i t y programme, the c o n f l i c t must be s e n s i b l e solved. However, no way o f s o l v i n g i t can be g iv e n a p r i o r i . This q u es tio n should be s o lv e d by those who are so s e r i o u s l y and d eeply devoted to n o n v io le n c e as to undertake the e f f o r t of i n c l u ding i t in common m o r a l i t y .
C h a ir of E t h i t s U n i v e r s i t y of Łódź
. Ewa Nowicka-Włodarczyk
MORALNt PROGRAMY NIESTOSOWANIA PRZEMOCY - NIEKTÓRE WARUNKI ICH SKUTECZNEJ R E A L IZ A C JI
Moralne programy r e z y g n a c j i ze stosow ania przemocy są z ja w ią s k ie n zasługującym na w n ik liw ą uwagę. W swym a r t y k u l e p rz y jm u ję ,
2e j e s t m o ra ln ie pożądane, aby zakres stosow ania tych programów w rozwiązywaniu k o n f l i k t ó w in d yw id ua ln yc h i grupowych u l e g a ł r o z s z e r z a n i u . Ponadto zakładam, ze n a j b a r d z i e j efe k tyw ne , spośród r ó ż nych systemów normatywnych r e g u lu j ą c y c h zachowania je d n o s te k w s p o łe c z e ń s t w ie , są normy m oralno ści p o t o c z n e j. J e j cechą c h a r a k t e r y s t y c z n ą j e s t u n ik a n ie s k r a j n o ś c i . W a r t y k u l e staram s i ę wyka zać, że p o e t u l a t y " n o n v i o l e n c e " mogą być traktow ane ja k o pro gram m oralno ści p o to c z n e j po odrzuceniu tych programów, k t ó r e z je d n e j s tr o n y t r a k t u j ą p o s t u l a t n ie s to s o w a n ia przemocy ja k o k a t e goryczny nakaz moralny (absolutyzm moralny L . T o ł s t o j a ) , a z dru g i e j zaś - w sposób w y łą c z n ie in s t ru m e n ta ln y (p r o p o z y c je M. Lernę- r a ) .
