What is Synderesis?

The term synderesis refers to a faculty of human nature that provides an innate sense of right and wrong. It is often used interchangeably with the term conscience, although conscience is more accurately defined a conatural principle derived from applied reason and practice, while synderesis is an innate property of human nature and the soul. It can be considered to be an innate understanding of Divine Wisdom.

The first mention of the term synderesis is attributed to St. Jerome, an early medieval scholastic theologian. The nature of this term and how it relates to conscience and moral philosophy was a topic of intense discussion throughout the middle ages, and was intrinsically tied to considerations of natural law theory. It was covered by St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, Peter Lombard, and William of Ockham extensively, and for a solid treatment of this principle Aquinas’ Summa Theologica is one of the more invaluable resources for exploring this concept in relation to the natural law.

It has been proposed that the term synderesis is just a form of the older concept of syneidesis, which is would be valid, but perhaps it can be though of more accurately as a more refined and explicit version of that concept, and related to the idea of scintilla conscientia. As an innate power or habit which inclines the human being towards that which is good and right, it can be thought of as the spark of conscience or a power/faculty of the Divine Spark in more emanationist terms.

Why does syndersis matter?

In modern society and philosophy, there is a general rejection of the idea that there exists any objective moral sense. We exist in a social context that is not only pluralistic, but is also materialistic in the sense that it rejects any attempt to realize metaphysical discussion. All morality is considered to be subjective and relative, and any attempt to assert that there exists an objectively true moral framework is considered to be superfluous or misguided.

The attitude of pure moral relativism and the predominant idea that “man is the arbiter of all things” seems to lead to a situation where it is impossible to find a real common ground for which ethical and moral problems can be discussed and applied in any universal sense. The only acceptable criteria for what is right and wrong or that which can be asserted as true are decided by: arbitrary authority (legal positivism), scientific inquiry (positivism which often conflates causality and mechanism), or what is popular (ad populum).

Synderesis and some aspects of early moral theory may provide a foundation that can be useful for a more jurisprudent social predisposition that can allow for tolerance and peaceful coexistence within the modern pluralistic sociocultural context.

// Implications

Implications

The concept of synderesis is inextricably tied to questions that involve the very nature of the human being, or what it means to be essentially human. The concept has largely fallen into obscurity, especially with the advent and prominence of rationalism and empiricism as philosophic modes which reject the validity of a priori and metaphysical assertions. While the concepts of natural law and natural rights did reach a zenith of influence during the enlightenment, with the predisposition of modern philosophical inquiry towards more positivistic and relativistic ends, the understanding of these principles in the minds of the general population have largely degraded.

In a modern pluralistic social context, such foundational assumptions may serve an important purpose. Eschewing first principles in favor of absolute utilitarianism foster the moral degeneration of society by making it impossible to have a real sense of common ground. How can we respect other people, their rights, and their dignity if it is impossible to agree upon a basic foundation for what those rights actually are, and more importantly what faculties make us uniquely human?

Synderesis can be thought of as several things at once: a perceptive faculty of human psychology; a habituated, conatural form of trained judgement that is somewhat antecedent to reason; as a latent spiritual power inherent in the Divine Spark that is seed to the human spirit that should be cultivated.

By acknowledging and cultivating this faculty, the quality of character and jurisprudence within society will naturally increase. As a result, a greater attainment of freedom and social tolerance will naturally result as the ability to determine truth and real rights become more intuitive and endemic to the culture. It is, in my opinion, one of the major components of the antidote to a culture marked by a lack of respect and love for others, a need for constant external validation with respect to the rightness of one’s actions, and the resultant justifications for acting contrary to what is right by abnegating one’s sense of moral judgement.