Auberon Herbert Quotes

To what extent is any given man morally responsible for any given act? We do not know.

There is nothing good or evil save in the will.

The power of choosing good and evil is within the reach of all.

I believe firmly that in making ethical decisions, man has the prerogative of true freedom of choice.

To deny the freedom of the will is to make morality impossible.

If you tie a man's hands there is nothing moral about his not committing murder.

Every judgement of conscience, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, is obligatory, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always sins.

The more...we consider man to be free, the less we can say, that he can neglect to use reason, or choose evil in preference to good

One might rationally argue that individual human beings should be free choose what moral behavior they approve of, and which they don't, subject to the constraints of the law.

The act of willing this or that, of choosing among various courses of conduct, is central in the realm of ethics.

An act has no ethical quality whatever unless it be chosen out of several all equally possible.

What can I know? What ought I to do? What can I hope?

There is no right in acting.

While early childhood experiences may impel, they do not compel. In the end, evil is a matter of choice.

No one is born evil; it's just the choices that they make.

Moral liberty is the power of following, in all circumstances, our sense of right and wrong, or of acting in conformity to our reflecting and moral principles, without being controlled by any contrary principles.

If the Soviet Government orders me to act against my conscience, I do not obey …. Conscience is above the law. No law which is against the conscience can bind.

The most disturbing thing, I think, with people that do very morally devious things more and more often is to see that they completely feel that they had no choice in the matter.

The distinction between good and evil is meaningless if one does not have the freedom to choose between them.

Choice is the essence of ethics: if there were no choice there would be no ethics, no good, no evil; good and evil have meaning only insofar as man is free to choose.

Without that freedom to sin there is also no freedom to love.

No intelligent man believes that anybody ever willingly errs or willingly does base and evil deeds; they are well aware that all who do base and evil things do them unwillingly.

That free will was demonstrated in the placing of temptation before man with the command not to eat of the fruit of the tree which would give him a knowledge of good and evil, with the disturbing moral conflict to which that awareness would give rise.

Is there one specific source that determines correct morality and everybody should follow that? Or should individuals come up with following that source or not depending on their situation?

Relationships do not preclude issues of morality.