2004年，在美国伦理批评的启发下，文学伦理学批评由聂珍钊教授倡导在中国诞生，并迅速发展成为在中国文学批评界广泛运用的理论与方法。2012年底，第二届国际文学伦理学批评学术研讨会在中国宜昌举行。这次会议的一项重要成果，就是成立了国际文学伦理学批评研究会(The International Association for Ethical Literary Criticism, IAELC)。

国际文学伦理学批评研究会是创新文学伦理学批评理论、实践文学伦理学批评方法、重视文学创作和文学批评中的伦理价值取向的国际文学和文化组织。研究会现任会长是浙江大学聂珍钊教授，副会长是维也纳大学弗拉基米尔·比蒂教授、伦敦大学金史密斯学院露茜娅·博尔德里尼教授、韩国东国大学金英敏教授、上海交通大学尚必武教授、俄罗斯国立大学伊戈尔·奥列格维奇·沙伊塔诺夫教授、华中师范大学苏晖教授、塔尔图大学居里·塔尔维特教授、英国伦敦大学玛丽女王学院加林·提哈诺夫教授，浙江大学杨革新教授担任秘书长，马来亚大学潘碧华教授、匈牙利科学院彼得·哈杜伊教授、韩国外国语大学林大根教授、宁波大学王松林教授担任副秘书长。

国际文学伦理学批评研究会的成立是顺势而为，其目的是为了解决有关文学价值的争论，推动文学伦理学批评方法在文学研究中的运用。早在十年前，中国学界就曾经出现过一场有关文学终结论的讨论，其核心是关于文学价值的问题，即是我们为什么需要文学，或者文学具有什么功能的问题。在文学终结论者看来，后现代主义时代, 文学已经完成了它的使命，电子媒体将不可避免地取代文学。这种貌似有理的论调，其实并不能说明文学将在现代媒体时代死亡，最多只能说明文学的形式或传播方式发生了变化。文学的历史证明，只要文学的伦理价值仍然存在，文学就不会终结。

文学为什么不会终结？这是由文学的伦理性质决定的。根据达尔文的进化理论，人类从猿进化而来，这是生物进化的结果。从猿到人的进化是人类文明史上第一次选择，即自然选择。这次选择的最大成果是人类获得了人的形式，但这远没有解答斯芬克斯在谜语中对有关什么是人的追问，即没有解决人的本质问题。因此，人类在通过自然选择获得人的形式之后，还需要通过伦理选择获取人的本质。自然选择是人类文明史上人类的第一次选择，伦理选择是人类文明史上人类的第二次选择。通过伦理选择，人类才真正成为有理性的人。

人类文明进步的历史就是如此形成的。自然选择是人类进化的过程，它通过遗传变异完成，伦理选择是人类教诲的过程，它借助文学实现。人类在获得人的形式之后，都毫无例外要经历伦理选择的过程。婴儿的诞生，就是自然选择的结果，但是婴儿只有经过文学的启蒙才能进入伦理选择的过程，真正成长起来，成为一个有理性的人。教与学以成人，这是伦理选择的必由之路。教与学离不开文学，人类需要借助文学的教诲进行伦理选择。只要人的生命存在，人的伦理选择就没有终结，就需要文学的教诲。因此，只要人类存在，文学的价值就是永恒的。

国家有不同，种族有区別，语言多变化，但是文学的伦理本质及伦理的功能却是相同的。正如吴元迈先生所指出的那样，“文学伦理学批评归根结底是价值批评，而价值的基础是求善”。文学伦理学批评不仅要从人类文明进步的逻辑证明文学永恒的伦理价值，而且还要借助自己的批评话语分析文学文本，从中发现加速人类伦理选择过程的道德榜样，从中获取让我们择善弃恶的伦理警示。无论是让我们崇尚和效仿的英雄，还是让我们厌恶和谴责的恶徒，我们都能从中感受到文学伦理的强大力量。

In 2004, the concept of ethical literary criticism, informed by ethical criticism in America, was proposed by Prof. Nie Zhenzhao in China and thereafter was soon widely accepted and employed as theory and methodology in literature studies among Chinese scholars. In December 2012, the 2nd International Symposium on Ethical Literary Criticism was held in the city of Yichang. One of the major achievements of this conference is the establishment of the International Association for Ethical Literary Criticism (IAELC）.

IAELC is an international literary and cultural organization which aims to link all those working in ethical literary criticism in theory and practice and to encourage the discussion of ethical value in literary creation and criticism. Currently, Professor Nie Zhenzhao of Zhejiang University is the President of IAELC. The Vice-Presidents are as follows: Professor Vladimir Biti of the University of Vienna, Professor Lucia Boldrini of Goldsmith, University of London, Professor Youngmin Kim of Dongguk University, Professor Shang Biwu of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Professor Igor Shaytanov of the Russian State University for the Humanities, Professor Su Hui of Central China Normal University, Professor Jüri Talvet of the University of Tartu, and Professor Galin Tihanov of Queen Mary, University of London. The Secretary-General is Professor Yang Gexin of Zhejiang University. The Deputy Secretary-Generals are Professor Pik Wah Fan of the University of Malaya, Professor Péter Hajdu of Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Professor Lim Daegeun of Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, and Professor Wang Songlin of Ningbo University.

The establishment of IAELC is one of the first fruits of the development of ethical literary criticism. It aims to deal with the dispute over the value of literature and to encourage the application of ethical literary criticism in literature studies. About decades ago, there was a dispute over the death of literature in Chinese academia, centering around the value of literature—or in other words, the questions of why we need literature and of what are the functions of literature. For those who believe in the death of literature, literature in the age of postmodernism has run its course and will inevitably be replaced by digital media. This plausible claim does not explain the disappearance of literature in the modern age of media, although it does signify that the form of literature (or the mode of transmission) has changed. The history of literature has proved that as long as the ethical value of literature exists, literature will not come to its end.

The fact that literature will not die is defined by the ethical dimension of literature. Darwin formulates a scientific argument for the theory of human evolution from apes by means of natural selection. Although natural selection, as the first selection of human civilization, reveals the process of how human beings have acquired their current physical traits in adaptation, it is inadequate in explaining the nature of human as embodied in Sphinx’s riddle. It is in this sense that ethical selection becomes the second selection in the development of human civilization, as human beings must cultivate rationality through ethical choice.

These are the footsteps of the development of human civilization. Natural selection is the process of human evolution by which biological traits become common in a population through hereditary variation, while ethical selection is the process of human edification made possible by the production and consumption of literature. All human beings without exception must go through the process of ethical selection after acquiring human form. Although the birth of a baby is the result of natural selection, its transformation into a rational human being is conditioned by the enlightenment from literature and accordingly the experience of ethical selection. When making ethical choices in life, mankind relies on the teachings from literature. As long as mankind exists on the earth, they must constantly make ethical choices guided by the messages from literature. In is in this sense that the value of literature is bound up with the fate of men.

Under the cloak of the differences in country, region and language, the function and nature of literature remains constant. As Professor Wu Yuanmai states, “Ultimately, ethical literary Criticism is value criticism, which is built on the pursuit of goodness.” Ethical literary criticism, which explains the ethical value of literature from the logic of human civilization, reflects the efforts to examine moral models in the literary text when confronted with ethical dilemma and to discuss the ethical message of learning virtue while abstaining from vice. It is in the analysis of admirable heroes as well as despicable villains that we understand the ethical function of literature.