This is another one of those big issues that just simply can’t be solved by one 22 year old in one blog post. But I am more than willing to open up the conversation and share some of my thoughts and views on morality and ethics. Feel free to add your own :)
Where do we get our morals from? Why do we feel guilty when we do something “wrong”? Why are compassion and love “good” and hate and murder “evil”? Under the banner of morality and ethics is a vast number of confronting and reasonable questions that one has to ask themselves.
So what is morality and where does it come from?
Morality through Holy Scripture,
Some believe our morals and ethics come from God through inspired scripture. That inside a certain holy text are the rules and guidelines God wants all humans to follow to live good moral lives. I have a few problems with this view. If you believe that God is revealed to us through the bible or the Quran for example. Then you have to account for the atrocities God commands of his people in the Old Testament:
Deuteronomy 3:3-7,
So the LORD our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors. At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them - the whole region of Argob, Og's kingdom in Bashan. All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. We completely destroyed them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying every city - men, women and children. But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities we carried off for ourselves.
Joshua 6: 20-21,
When the trumpets sounded, the people shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the people gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so every man charged straight in, and they took the city. They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it - men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.
Numbers 31:15 -18,
"Have you allowed all the women to live?" he (Moses) asked them. "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.”
A common answer for this is we don’t have a right to judge God on the basis of who, when or how he chooses to end someone’s life. He is the author of life and therefore has the right to take it away as he wishes. Ok fair enough, I guess if God really did give us life it would be well within his right to take it away as he chooses.
BUT!
If the God that is the author of our moral intuitions is also the God revealed to us through Holy Scripture. Why is it so many of us are morally outraged at the previous scenarios ordained by God through scripture? The idea of slaughtering a baby, regardless of race or religion, is to me to most disgusting, perverted act any human being can commit and the very idea that a moral God would command such a thing is incomprehensible to me. Can you imagine the poor mothers screaming for mercy as “God’s people” came in chopping their little ones heads off? In human society today, when dictators come to power that bring nothing but misery and suffering to people and command the slaughter of woman and children, do we praise them and worship them? Do we say, oh well they have a right to do it? No, the actions make us sick to our stomach and we combine with the rest of the world to try and rid ourselves of such an evil. I think it’s fair to ask then why do we give God a free pass in our holy scriptures? Why do we turn a blind eye to this and refuse to call it immoral as far as our moral intuitions are concerned?
Who is really exercising their moral intuition here? Someone that just believes whatever is in Holy Scripture has to be true, or those of us that judge the individual actions by their own merit, according to our moral intuitions. Why even defend such passages? To me it’s pretty clear if there is such a "moral God”, he or she had nothing to do with the commandment to slaughter an entire population, this sounds like the typical work of an ancient tribalistic society justifying its thirst to squash its surrounding “enemies” who worship a different God and have a completely different culture. Why not truly exercise our moral intuition when reading scripture, accept the things we know are good, like the lessons on love and compassion that are clearly in the bible and Quran and put an end to the silly justification of moral acts so heinous they make modern day human dictators look like the Easter bunny!
Our Moral Conscience,
Our moral conscience and our sense of guilt play a large role in defining our moral choices. Is this too a gift from God to help us discern right from wrong? Maybe, but what we need to take into account is the differences in moral conscience between different cultures and religions. If a Muslim man missed one of his 5 prayers he is commanded to make throughout the day, I dare say he will feel a strong sense of moral conviction. If a Jewish man dishonours the Sabbath he too would feel a strong sense of moral conviction. Would a Christian or Hindu feel the same feelings of moral conviction or “guilt” over the same actions? I think not. So, does God have different rules of morality for different people OR is our moral conscience largely shaped by our culture and religious upbringing?
But the question still remains. How do we decide right from wrong?
Well I don’t think our moral decisiveness is quite as black and white as some would have us believe. Our moral intuitions arise from a myriad of different influences. Our family, culture, friends and our religious beliefs all play a huge role in defining what we consider to be moral and immoral. If we look throughout history our idea of what is “moral” and “ethical” has radically changed from era to era. Slavery used to be a big part of our dark history in the west and was only abolished in 1807, cat burning was seen as entertainment in France in the Middle Ages and even into the Renaissance, dozens of cats were thrown into a net and hoisted over a fire and burned alive to which people would gather around and laugh and clap. Polygamy was once common practice, the suppression of women’s rights and public executions as social entertainment have all played their role in Christian societies once upon a time. If our moral conscience comes from an absolute source, than why is it our concept of morality is a progressive process?
Even something you would think an obvious moral decision like murder can have two opposing sides. Take war for example, some people believe in just war, some people believe all war is immoral. Some people believe in an eye for an eye, some people believe in turning the other cheek. Some people believe that using embryonic stem cells is murder, some people believe it isn’t. Our moral conscience seems to be divided between us and very much influenced by varying forces around us and in my opinion cannot be used as an argument for the absolute. So is right and wrong nothing more than someone else’s opinion of truth? Do we then have a right to question each other’s morals and ethics? I think we do.
Morality from a practical point of view,
I believe morality like everything else on this planet has gone through a process of evolution. Society’s that discover that when people work together as a group, create good environments to raise healthy children for the next generation, have easy access to food and water and good relationships with their fellow neighbours are the kind of society’s that are going to flourish and prosper in this world. Those that don’t will be on the straight path to extinction. How long do you think a society will last if its moral code was “murder and steal from anyone you want?” My guess is not very long.
It should be no surprise than that the religions and cultures that have survived with us today are the ones that emphasize kindness, love and teamwork (At least within their own tribes). I suppose if you really wanted to you could argue that maybe this was God’s plan all along. Maybe he oversaw the process of moral revelation throughout the ages so we would truly know the difference between right and wrong, and the reason our morals are evolving is because they are moving closer towards Gods true enlightened values. Maybe, but a series of questions then arise about the kind of God that would allow us for millenia to kill each other and perform acts of unspeakable cruelty on our fellow human beings while idly watching from the sidelines. But I suppose this is still within the realm of possibilities. But whether God is the author of our morals or not still doesn’t take away the practical and rational reasons behind being kind and loving and the fact we SHOULD act this way towards our fellow human beings if we want to see all of us prosper in this world, and for now that’s good enough for me.
Conclusion,
If we strip away bit by bit our religious understanding of morality I think it’s pretty clear that when it comes down to it morality isn’t about trying to please God, it’s not about trying to make it to the pearly gates or from fear of burning in hell forever. When it comes down to it morality is about common human decency. It’s about both realising and acting on those feelings of empathy and compassion we all feel towards each other. As Sam Harris writes:
“No tribal fictions need be rehearsed for us to realize, one fine day, that we do, in fact, love our neighbours, that our happiness is inextricable from their own, and that our interdependence demands that people everywhere be given the opportunity to flourish.”
Is it any surprise that all the religions that are with us today have one connected theme throughout them all? It’s called the golden rule. And if you had to sum up morality in one sentence, this would be it:
Christianity: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” Matthew 7:12
Confucianism: “Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state.” Analects 12:2
Buddhism: “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.” Udana-Varga 5,1
Hinduism: “This is the sum of duty; do naught onto others what you would not have them do unto you.” Mahabharata 5,1517
Islam: “No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.” Sunnah
Judaism: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.”Talmud, Shabbat 3id
Taoism: “Regard your neighbours gain as your gain, and your neighbour’s loss as your own loss.” Tai Shang Kan Yin Pien
Zoroastrianism: “That nature alone is good which refrains from doing another whatsoever is not good for itself.” Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5
But does it really matter where we draw our inspiration to be loving and compassionate? Shouldn’t the important part be in the actual actions themselves? Whether we draw our inspiration from religion, God, science, nature, philosophy or just a common understanding of what it feels like to be human. Whatever it is, just remember the thing that has brought us this far is the realisation that we are the same, that what I feel you feel also and the best feeling I know in this world is to love and to be loved, so i will do my best to return the favour. So whatever it is that inspires you to be a more tolerant, kind and loving human being, I say hold onto it, And let others do the same.
Peace,
Jason
No comments:
Post a Comment