In this chapter I shall discuss the relation between moral paradigm and moral theory. I shall begin with an analysis of the of paradigm: cultural paradigm, moral paradigm, and moral . This discussion should lay the foundation for an analysis of the of highest good, moral , and moral rule. What is the relation between these three ? What is the source of the philosopher’s conception of the highest good? My aim, in rais- ing these questions is to explore the foundation of moral theory, for only in knowing this foundation can we discover a criterion for the evaluation of the adequacy of moral theory. I shall trace this source to the philosopher’s view of the moral vision embedded in the moral paradigm and show that the of moral value, and consequently moral rule, is derived from the philosopher’s conception of the highest good. The structure of a moral theory reflects the structure of the moral paradigm in which it is based. I am anxious to show that the task of moral theory is, in the final analysis, determined by the struc- ture of a community’s view of the highest good. We know whether a moral theory is adequate by an examination of the values implicit in the moral vi- sion of the community. This vision is the ultimate criterion by which we evaluate the adequacy of a moral theory. Broadly speaking, by “paradigm” I mean a general way, or pattern, of behaving, that is, of thinking, feeling, and acting in a domain of human expe- rience, for example, in the domain of art, , politics, business, society, , , or . Thinking is the medium of , and it is based in the intellect; feeling is the medium of value, and it is based in senti- ment; and acting is the medium of behavior, and it is based in the will. The realm of experience is the realm of “action,” or “behavior.” “To behave” is to act in a certain way; a behavior is a way of acting. When used as a general term, “action” is a way of acting. I shall use “action” interchangeably with “behavior.” What makes a way of behaving general is the that a commu- nity (a group, a society, or a group of societies), or the majority of its mem- bers, adopts a certain way of thinking, feeling, and acting. Each domain of human experience constitutes a type of behavior; for example, religious, eco- nomic, or social behavior. The unity of the different domains of behavior con- stitutes the life of the community. A paradigm is created when a community embraces a system of beliefs and values as the guiding of its action within a type of behavior. For instance, religious behavior in a community is paradigmatic if its members uphold a generally recognized of religious beliefs and values. The paradigmatic emerges from the unity and dominance of these beliefs and values in their religious behavior. A religious 8 FRIENDSHIP: A CENTRAL MORAL VALUE paradigm, then, is a kind of . The structure of this framework consists of the religious beliefs and values the community upholds in practice. These two concepts, beliefs and values, function (a) as ideals, and (b) as principles of action. They do not exist only as something external to what the people think, feel, and do, but also as the moving forces of their re- ligious behavior. In , they become an integral part, indeed the basic con- ceptual and affective equipment, of the way they think, feel, act, and respond to the world around them. This way shapes their religious outlook. Religion ceases to be, for them, a set of beliefs that exists in their minds only, or as social ideals; it becomes a way of life. As a of fact, most religious peo- ple are not versatile in the of their religion, just as most patriotic citizens are not versatile in the constitution of their country, even though such a constitution is written and recognized as the political ideal of the coun- try. For example, they know how to behave religiously, and they know what it means to be religious, but they do not necessarily know the basic assumptions and principles that underlie their religious behavior or whether these assump- tions and principles are justifiable. Is it an accident that almost all the relig- ious of the different societies of the world have special educa- tional programs or schools for teaching their members the fundamentals of their religion? But the paradigmatic quality is not exclusive of a certain type of behav- ior; it applies equally to all the major types of behavior–political, scientific, artistic, moral, economic, religious, or educational. These types constitute what is generally known as the basic institutions of society. The structure of a society is made up of these institutions. Each one of them represents a para- digmatic type of behavior. Accordingly, we can speak of religious, moral, political, or scientific paradigms. The members of the community behave within these institutions according to a generally accepted set of beliefs and values. These beliefs and values are the basis of the paradigmatic types of behavior; they are what give them their particular structure and iden- tity. However, in addition to the institutions that make up the structure of so- ciety, the itself is a kind of paradigm, a cultural paradigm, since, in comparison with the other , the members of a society conduct their lives according to a general set of beliefs and values. These beliefs and values constitute which I shall presently call its . They make up the fabric of its culture and they are the ultimate source of the particular beliefs and val- ues that give structure and to its different paradigmatic types of be- havior. Thus, to begin with, we can distinguish two types of paradigm, institu- tional and cultural. The first includes any paradigmatic type of behavior and the second includes any culture inasmuch as it is a type, for example, Greek or Egyptian culture. The first important task, then, I shall endeavor to under- take is to explicate the idea of a paradigm. The point I shall emphasize is that a paradigm, institutional or cultural, is both a conceptual framework and an existential mode of behavior; it is a set of beliefs and values and a way of