Page 259 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

E T H O S A N D C U LT U R E : B E YO N D E T H I C S
Ethics differs from ontology in that it is not concerned with
the truth of being, but with behavior—what man does—ac-
cording to logical principles. Ontology concerns all beings
and their truth; ethics is limited to human conduct. In this
perspective, existence tends to be identified with practice, as
Western theology gradually came to equate being with act,
culminating in the notion of God as actus purus. In this way,
practice becomes the truth of being, and ethics is absolutized.
At the same time, behavior is grounded in logic. The mor-
al is what accords with reason—whether understood as ideal
or as useful. In both cases, ethics becomes subject to human
logic, either as idealism or as pragmatism. This leads further
to the imposition of human logic upon nature. What is called
“natural” often reflects not nature itself, but what appears log-
ical to us. Yet modern science shows that unpredictability and
disorder belong to nature itself. Even ecological ethics fre-
quently remains anthropocentric, seeking benefit for man
rather than respect for creation. Ethics, by its very structure,
remains rational and anthropocentric, and therefore cannot
be ontological.
Thus ethics stands in contrast to the ontology of the Fa-
thers. It concerns behavior rather than being; it seeks “well-
being” rather than “being.” It ignores death—the ultimate
problem—and focuses on moral improvement. Ontology,
however, aims at overcoming death. Ethics, in this sense,
blinds man to his mortality and offers no real answer to it.
Yet this does not mean that ontology is indifferent to hu-
man behavior. On the contrary, it calls for a deeper under-
standing of what we might call ethos. Ethics, as a system of
rational principles, must be distinguished from ethos, which
arises from the life of a community and is expressed through
symbols and shared practices. When one makes the sign of the
259