And this isn't ethics either. In five days, I will be 60. Though I wasn't going to talk about myself, there is a growing sense that I need to get serious, not allow myself the luxury of yet more displacement activity metaphysical system construction (so much more absorbing than Meccano!) or ethical posturing (don't you dare take the moral high ground with a moral philosopher!).
No, it's too serious for that. This is between me and the evil demon. I just remembered something I wrote about Levinas not too long ago:
[T]here was a time when I would have been prepared to argue for the necessity of ethical principles, along the lines of Levinas' notion of the irresistible ethical command of 'the Other'. In my book Naive Metaphysics I articulate the case for ethics as a presupposition of there being such a thing as a 'shared world' or 'truth' for me pretty hard things to give up. But needs must where the Devil drives.To be fair to Levinas, my new scepticism is in a way closer to his way of thinking, because he insists on the impossibility of deriving ethics through rational argument. Faith in 'reason and nothing but' is the Enlightenment project which led to the gas chambers. Levinas demands a different kind of faith, ethical faith, as the foundation for metaphysics. Maybe he's right, but that doesn't satisfy me.
Now, from my more sober perspective, Levinas, like Geach just seems to me one more in a long line of apologists for religion, even if Levinas is far more circumspect in introducing the God concept. And I have set my face against religion in all its forms. It is time for the human race to grow up, and recognize that we only have ourselves as terrifying as that prospect may seem. Ethics is in the dock, and, as they say, 'the jury is still out'.
Tentative Answers: God, ethics and Euthyphro's dilemma