"Nowadays the idea that one should follow one's conscience when wrestling with ethical problems seems simple and straightforward. Already by 1750 it could be taken for granted: 'that every man should regulate his actions by his own conscience, without any regard to the opinions of the rest of the world, is one of the first precepts of moral prudence,' noted Samuel Johnson. Before 1700, however, it constituted a direct repudiation of conventional thinking about the inherent corruption of humanity and the fallibility of private scruples. To make sincerity the final judge of sinfulness was to bypass the essential duty of informing one's self adequately, of seeking truth and taking responsibility for error. It unjustifiably presumed that individual men and women could judge right and wrong for themselves, without the aid of scripture, laws, or teachers. It even implied that moral norms might be relative.
Men were seen as being better able to control themselves than women.
"Nowadays the idea that one should follow one's conscience when wrestling with ethical problems seems simple and straightforward. Already by 1750 it could be taken for granted: 'that every man should regulate his actions by his own conscience, without any regard to the opinions of the rest of the world, is one of the first precepts of moral prudence,' noted Samuel Johnson. Before 1700, however, it constituted a direct repudiation of conventional thinking about the inherent corruption of humanity and the fallibility of private scruples. To make sincerity the final judge of sinfulness was to bypass the essential duty of informing one's self adequately, of seeking truth and taking responsibility for error. It unjustifiably presumed that individual men and women could judge right and wrong for themselves, without the aid of scripture, laws, or teachers. It even implied that moral norms might be relative.
Men were seen as being better able to control themselves than women.