The ethics of Hercules — Context and Discussion

A Mechanistic Foundation for Ethics

Givler positions his work as a corrective to ethical theories that forget 'it is the human body which performs every human action.' He aligns ethics with applied science, arguing that conduct problems are solved by understanding the mechanics of the human organism. The preface explicitly states that 'ethics and physiology can no longer be studied apart from one another.' This is not a metaphorical claim; Givler insists that the structure and functions of the body have determined ethical values themselves. The title's reference to Hercules underscores the emphasis on strength, skill, and persistence—qualities rooted in physical capability.

The 114 Terms: Defining 'Right' Through Usage

A central feature of the excerpts is Givler's classification of 114 terms under the concept of 'right.' He divides them into classes such as 'Straight,' 'Direct,' and 'Immediately,' with subclasses that include geometric definitions (e.g., 'right line,' 'right angle') and idiomatic expressions (e.g., 'right away,' 'right the helm'). Each term is presented as evidence of how people actually use the word to point out objects or relationships, or to indicate expected behavior. Givler argues that this empirical method reveals the common tendency: 'the controlling and directing of human energies, the employment of technique to further man’s purposes.'

Rejecting Transcendent Morality

Givler is blunt in dismissing any appeal to a 'higher and immutable right.' He calls such insistence 'a sign of mal-observation or of logorrhea.' For him, a strictly scientific ethics does not go beyond what the word 'right' signifies in actual behavior. He challenges those who demand an ultimate criterion to 'attempt to be God,' adding that 'the role of deity might, under the circumstances, be even more difficult to play than the more familiar rôle of man.' This rhetorical move underscores his commitment to a naturalistic, this-worldly framework.

Reading the Argument as a First-Time Reader

The excerpts suggest that Givler builds his case incrementally, moving from the preface's manifesto to a detailed linguistic analysis. A first reader should note how the classification of terms serves as the empirical backbone of the argument. The footnoted lists of subclasses (e.g., 'straight,' 'direct,' 'immediately') are not mere appendices but the evidence from which Givler derives his conclusions. Pay attention to how he defines each class 'in behavioristic terms' and then synthesizes them into a single concept of 'right' as technique and control. The tone is combative, especially in the closing remarks about logorrhea and playing God.

Givler's approach is unusual for its time: he treats ethics as a branch of natural science, using linguistic analysis to ground moral terms in bodily behavior. Readers should approach the text as a sustained argument for a mechanistic worldview, not as a conventional moral philosophy. The excerpts show a writer who is both systematic and provocative, willing to challenge cherished ideals. Whether or not one accepts his premises, the book offers a clear, if contentious, framework for rethinking the foundations of ethics.

After reading that book on Hercules, how our sense of “right” comes down to bodies and habits, I found myself thinking about old disputes over heresy. It’s strange. Philosophumena; or, The refutation of all heresies, Volume II — Edition Insights feels like a distant echo of that same stubborn refusal to look beyond flesh and bones, and I keep turning both over in my head.