Ok so I'm trying to analyze the essay De la educación moral by Gabino Barreda but I'm stuck on these two paragraphs. Thus far in the essay I've found that he's trying to prove that religion itself is poitnless and irrelavent because all the rules and what not are constantly changing over time and by location and religion. I can't seem to figure out what he's saying here though. Is just stating that Conducet proved that being evil is not an innate human instinct? and if so how exactly would that tie back into the argument?
La semejanza, dice Condorcet, entre los preceptos morales de todas las religiones y de todas las sectas filosóficas, bastaría para probar que aquéllos son de una verdad independiente de los dogmas de estas religiones y de los principios de estas sectas, y que el origen de las ideas de justicia y de virtud, y el fundamento de los deberes, se debe buscar en la constitución moral del hombre". —Condorcet, Progresos del entendimiento humano (traducción castellana). París, 1823, pág. 118.
Este deseo de Condorcet, de buscar en el hombre mismo y no en los dogmas religiosos la causa y el fundamento de la moral, o mejor diré, esta predicción de su profundo genio se ha realizado ya. Estaba reservado al genio de Gall venir a demostrar con argumentos irrefragables, fundados tanto en un análisis admirable de las facultades intelectuales y afectivas del hombre y en un estudio comparativo de los animales, que hay en éstos como en aquél, tendencias innatas que los inclinan hacia el bien, como hay otras que los impelen hacia el mal; que estas inclinaciones tienen sus órganos en la masa cerebral, y que el hombre no es por lo mismo un ser exclusivamente inclinado al mal, como lo habían supuesto los teólogos y los metafísicos, sino que hay en él, como lo había establecido el buen sentido vulgar, inclinaciones benévolas que le son tan propias como las opuestas.
Let's see if I can summarize it for you. As far as Gabino Barreda is concerned, the government should take care of the moral order and not the church. (Or, the division of church and state). He feels the moral is confused with religious dogmas and instead, virtue and justice is in the moral constitution of man. He believes in the innate tendency of man toward good.
In his educational philosophy, he intended to stress the good inclinations and diminish the bad, as much as possible. He believed the scientific method should be primary.
He wanted radical reform of education and despite all odds, his Escuela Nacional Preparatoria (ENP) was successful. However the Mexican Government did not have the necessary financial backing and the educational system became more rounded.
Hopefully that will answer your basic question. Thank you for typing out those 2 paragraphs.
Sra
No hay que olvidar, aunque desconozco la fecha en que Barreda escribió este texto positivista (este último término nos da la clave, pues nos sitúa en históricamente), que México se estaba conformando y reconociendo como una nación renovada en las leyes (debe entenderse las Leyes de Reforma). Leyes modernas donde el Estado adquiere un papel central; mientras que el hombre, por su parte, como ser moral deberá a inclinarse hacia el bien (aunque también lo pueda hacer hacia el mal), ser virtuoso y justo, para una mejor sociedad.
Ricardo, Gabino Barreda escribió De la educación moral en 1863. Dirigió la enseñanza bajo el presidente Benito Juárez.
Sra
Gracias, por la información.
Atte. Ricardo.
Gracias Todos! :)
In these two paragraphs, Gabino Barreda references the ideas of Condorcet, a philosopher from the Enlightenment period. Condorcet argued that the similarity between moral precepts in all religions and philosophical sects is enough to prove that these precepts are based on a truth independent of specific religious dogmas or philosophical principles. He believed that the origin of ideas of justice, virtue, and moral duties should be sought in the moral constitution of humanity itself.
Barreda then states that Condorcet's desire to find the cause and foundation of morality within humanity itself, rather than in religious dogmas, has already been fulfilled. He mentions the genius of Gall, who provided irrefutable arguments based on insightful analysis of human intellectual and emotional faculties and a comparative study of animals. Gall demonstrated that both humans and animals possess innate tendencies that incline them towards good as well as tendencies that push them towards evil. These inclinations are believed to have their organs located in the cerebral mass. Contrary to the beliefs of theologians and metaphysicians who thought humans were exclusively inclined towards evil, Gall's findings showed that humans, as common sense had already established, also have innate benevolent inclinations.
In relation to Barreda's argument, these paragraphs suggest that the concept that evil is an inherent human instinct, as believed by theologians and metaphysicians, is contradicted by Gall's findings. By showcasing the presence of innate benevolent inclinations in humans, Gall's research supports the idea that the foundation of morality lies within human nature itself, rather than being dictated exclusively by religious doctrines. This aligns with Barreda's overall argument about the pointlessness and irrelevance of religion in shaping moral principles, as the source of morality is inherently human and not dependent on religious beliefs.