The futile quest of imposing morality

in philosophy •  7 months ago 

It's not an outrageous thing to say honestly, as much as it might anger a person or two. Morality is extremely subjective, and because this is the case, it's very impractical to attempt to define it in absolutes. Of course, this does not mean we don't try, and as matter of fact, much of our discourse has to do with our attempts to do so.



img src

I'm right, you are wrong


No doubt not all disagreements are edified on moral disagreements exclusively, but without a doubt all disagreements carry components of morality. We frame everything with our mental tooling, with our biases, and when we define "right and wrong", when we mature those concepts, we also become slaves to the necessity to catalogue all actions and inactions.

It's probably because of this that the arguments are never truly resolved. In other words, my mental tooling and that of my "opponent" can be so different, that if I'm unable to perceive the conceptual discrepancies, we are sure to talk past each other until egos have been bruised to a pulp.

All this to say that even the concept of "right and wrong" is not definite, and certainly not exclusive to you or me, nor does a "higher intellect" carry more weight, because even that assertion is biased by nature.

Exploring more What ifs


Is the only way I've personally found to make sense of it all, to make sense of actions that otherwise I would archive as "evil", as punitive by nature. There are some words used these days, some that seem to label the practice into a digestible concept, but I'm unsure it's accurate, simply because the ability to understand profoundly, does not equate emotional commitment of any kind. However, the word empath is somewhat common these days, and I've been called such a time or two.

Mental explorations, of any kind for that matter, have always shown to have considerable value in my life, because they've always allowed me to not react prematurely, and even though I'm fully aware I'm not in complete dominance of my emotional intelligence, I would like to believe ineptitude is not part of my game plan, as much at it wants to be at times.

About imposing


Which is really what started this whole thing, this "late in the day" post of mine. I have to say the mere idea baffles me, it even steals a chuckle from my composure. Is that even possible? How ridiculous can I be? Where is the logical consistency in the request?

The strawman can be best illustrated in a short parodical paragraph:

I and only I hold the truth, I know right, I know wrong, I judge your position, your actions, your thoughts and deem them incorrect and Immoral. Because I care, I've decided to voice how you should behave and by doing so, have gifted you the opportunity to fit my mold of right.

Oh my reader, if you are still out there, don't get caught in such quests, don't allow yourself to believe you own truth in absolutes... Those who build castles with cards, learn how feeble the foundations can be, very, very quickly.

@meno

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  
Loading...

It is for this reason, @meno, that I think anyone who falls on any side of social issues when it comes to governing bodies (where a lot of the moral imposing takes place), make a mistake when they try to make others bend to their will, because as sure as the pendulum swings their way, it will swing away from them, and they will find themselves on the opposite end of that imposition.

There tends to be moral ideas we can agree on. Most, I believe, feel that murder is wrong, with maybe an exception or two like for self-defense. I think most believe stealing is wrong, though they might justify theft in given situations (we've been seeing that here lately).

I think when it gets down to it, we can see the outcomes of social issues as more and more people push the boundaries. We can see that there is less heartbreak or anguish taking some paths than taking others. Our laws are pretty much predicated on somene's morality—hopefully holding with the majority, and allowing for practicality and exceptions where it makes sense. Unfortunately, reality isn't always so accommodating, which means we aren't either.

Totally agree with this statement and for that reason I avoid overthinking it and rely on one approach that guide me, my family. I feel an action being moral as long as I feel comfortable my family reading or hearing about if it became public soon after.

Posted using Partiko iOS

  ·  7 months ago (edited)

Querido amigo @meno, nadie tiene la verdad absoluta, todo es relativo como dicen, a veces lo que es bueno para ti, quizas no lo vea bien otra persona, asi que adelante... Sigue tu camino, sigue tu trabajo y cada quien lo vera como mejor le parezca... Nadie tiene la moral suficiente para juzgar sin ser juez y parte.

Whenever it comes to imposing something it takes place within some geographical region or country. One way to "escape" the imposed is to go to another community that shares your ideals up to a certain level of compromise you choose for yourself. In an ideal world, we would be able to freely move around the globe to find our community. I think this will be possible in the future but only after we have free flowing capital (cryptocurrencies) and when work opportunities are anonymous and virtual. We are already doing that on the internet, you can choose your community wherever they are. However, to transform the public space and order into an image of the internet requires a lot of progress that may seem impossible today.

Morality is an old concept but one that came about from the early days of civilisation. In small coummunities before towns and cities, most people would have known each other. There would have been very little need to explain to someone that stealing or murder was wrong as small communities would have been closely knit and therefore for these early people, their faith was focused on the outside world, animal spirits and ancestors who had shown them have to navigate the world.

It was with the advent of larger societies that the struggle for resources began and there needed to be some social convention to state what was acceptable and what wasn't. Moses had to come down from the mountain with commandments, but to most of us nowadays, those rules seem so obvious.

As with anything, we have slowly grown this body of morals and rules, far beyond their initial purpose which was to allow social cohesion in larger communities. For many it has now turned into a tool for control and those in control very rarely like to give it up.

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.