1 Answer

Modern and Traditional Ethical Thinking Defined 
One important way of characterizing ethical thinking is the distinction between traditional ethical thinking and modern ethical thinking. This distinction roughly corresponds to a chronological distinction between the classical and medieval worldview and the modern worldview. The modern period roughly begins in the 17th Century although modern patterns of thinking begin to emerge as early as the 14th Century. During this time, significant changes in the way humans thought about the basics of human life and existence underwent a radical shift. 

One aspect of this shift in thinking is know as the removal of "the sacred canopy." The classical and medieval worldview was a fundamentally religious one and the place of God or the gods was primary. As the modern world emerges, human beings begin to see themselves as more self-sufficient. They begin to look within themselves for the answers to important questions. The authority of God is no longer an adequate answer to the problems which confront the human race. The development of science with its goal of explaining and controlling nature demonstrates this basic shift in perspective. 

Traditional ethical thinking assumes that this sacred canopy provides the context for all of human life. God's authority is the ultimate justification for any ethical norms. All things are created by God and have a set place and purpose in the universe. Every being has a nature or an essence that defines its purpose in the grand scheme of things. The ultimate standard of human behavior is to fulfill this purpose. By fulfilling this purpose, each individual human will realize his or her full potential and be the best human that he or she can be. Behaviors and habits that fulfill this purpose are know as virtues while those that frustrate this purpose are known as vices. For traditional ethics, the idea that a behavior helps a person to be the best they can be and live the good life is the ultimate justification for a moral norm. Traditional ethics tends to be expressed in a series of prohibited activities which "thou shalt not" do and a series of virtues that point a person in the direction of the best possible life. 

Modern ethical thinking is free of this sacred canopy. There is no universal context for all human life, nor is there a human nature which points to a best possible human life. Modern ethical thinking eschews all these ideas and attempts to justify the same set of moral norms as traditional thinkers do but it does this by the authority of human reason. If one reasons rightly, then one will see that these universal norms are authoritative. The most basic rule of human activity for a modern person is to maximize personal freedom and limit the harm caused to others by one's actions. Modern people want to be free to pursue their own ends. The limit of this freedom is where another is hurt. Modern ethical thinking tends to reduce ethics to a series of rules and procedures that can be used to prevent the harm of others and to maximize human freedom. 

Some Examples of Modern and Traditional Ethical Thinking 
We can see an example of how these ways of thinking operate in our attitudes toward smoking. We have banned most public smoking in our modern culture. We now realize that public smoking harms those who inhale the smoke unintentionally. We are concerned that allowing people to smoke freely will cause harm to other people. So we ban smoking in public and designate special areas for smoking. So it is not the smoking that is the problem. People should be free to smoke as long as they take care not to harm others. A more traditional approach might see smoking as harmful to one's health. Smoking is wrong because it limits one's potential to live a good and full life. Modern ethical thinking is not concerned about this as long as no one else is hurt but traditional ethical thinking is also concerned with the individual actor. If an act does not contribute to the overall well being and happiness of the person acting as specified by the divinely ordained nature of the human person then that act is wrong. 

Traditional ethics are mainly concerned about what kind of person one is becoming through one's habitual activity. For traditional ethics, the moral task of life is to develop the right kind of habits that will lead to a flourishing life. Modern ethics is only concerned with whether or not an individual act violates a specific ethical norm. For modern ethics, the moral task of life is to conform to a set of ethical rules. We can look at a simple example: eating a slice of cake. There is nothing wrong with this act. It does not violate a moral norm and hurts no one. Looking at this from a traditional perspective, there is nothing wrong with enjoying a slice of cake. In fact, enjoying pleasurable things in moderation is a part of the good life. The problem comes in with multiple acts of cake eating repeated over time. If a habit of excessive cake eating develops this can be harmful to one's health. If a person becomes gluttonous, then this is not a full human life and is wrong. The person has not become a good sort of person. From a modern perspective, the act of eating cake is not wrong and no matter how many times it is repeated it will not be wrong. If a person wants to pursue cake eating as their version of the good life, he or she is free to do so as long as they do not hurt anyone (and they do not ask the state to pay for their medical expenses when they become unhealthy). So we can see how these different perspectives on ethical thinking play out in our analysis of various ethical issues. 

CONTINUED here>>http://sanctasapientia.hubpages.com/hub/The-Difference-Between-Modern-and-Traditional-Ethical-Thinking