Progressing Personal Liberty - A case for moral relativism
In the acceptance or creation of a moray, one needs
to begin contemplation with the presence or absence of harm and or the presence
or absence of goodly outcome.
Morality finds our minds mostly as memes from our
parents, and cultural influences as are extracted from the Metanarrative in which
our development is steeped. The innate human morality that exists, such as the
almost universally recognized morality of reciprocity (or as it is found in the
Christian world – the golden rule), is augmented by the aforementioned. There
is a tendency for many to grip morality in an unconscious manner, given the
nature of its introduction to our beings, morality is absent of a rationale,
it just is. Yet morals come to us both tacitly and explicitly, sometimes in
accord and sometimes in discord with each other. Often the Meta-Christian narrative ascribes
moral conduct that challenges fundamental human inclination. It is from these
realities that much inner and outer conflict occurs under the influence of
morality, often effecting “moral action” that results in pain. It is this
paradox where morals intended to manage human behaviour for good can distort
human action with the most inhuman results. The ability to discern morality is
innate and "god" given, it is in this context humanity must take the liberty to
examine its conduct in the context of morality and revise morality under an
umbrella of more complete knowledge. The best place to begin to consider
morality is to ask, "does this belief and my application of it, result in good
outcomes or in pain for others". Strict and fervent adherence to unclear and
tacitly transmitted moral structure is the source of outright evil. There have
been actual cases of mothers outcasting their own daughters as the result of
the daughter’s unwanted pregnancy. What could cause such behaviour, the meeting
of a child’s error with absolute immoral neglect? Extreme travesties happen as
societal pressure contorts the human psyche to the point where the moral code
promotes inhumane action.
As many such moral precepts transfer as memes from
one generation to another and where little thought is given to their origin or
purpose, contemplation is required to ensure good action. Morality when
considered in the context of rational purpose and good outcome takes on a
healthier character. Much biblical morality comes to us in this fashion from
our parents and or the Metanarrative of society at large. Biblical morality
was committed to paper thousands of years ago when the mastery of biology and
other related science was undiscovered. People learned from life experience
that sexuality out of wedlock caused social strife; exposure to illness and caused conflict. What is necessary for Christianity to keep pace with an
informed society is the recognition that knowledge and technology have offered
the neutralization of threats that precipitated the necessity for the moray in
the first place. In the absence of a rational basis for the assertion of a
given moray, people begin to challenge the validity of that moray and more
damaging, they then begin to challenge the morays carrying contemporary
pertinence. It is a better circumstance to allow the examination of morays in
the context of good outcomes and contemporary knowledge and provide latitude
on morays that can safely be allowed to pass from the collective
consciousness.
When one sets about the task of rationally examining
the collection of morals that determine our life actions, it becomes a
cumbersome task, as they reside so deeply in our psyche and morph with every
life exposure, the multitude, variability and transient nature of morals make
them almost impossible to list and make explicit. A young boy is schooled by
his mother to extend kindness to others and yet is later in life asked to find
a moral reprieve from acts of war. So, even a moral tenet in Christ’s teachings
as fundamental as respecting the life of another finds societal circumstances
justifying its psychological circumvention. Was St. Augustine’s just war theory
an act of moral relativism, or a practical moral adjustment, to what is at its
roots, a passive theology?
The precedent
for the adjustment of morality in the light of circumstance is hardly new, only
now it has a new handle, moral relativism. Moral relativism is merely a means
to rationalize moral conduct to new knowledge or circumstance. A Moral action, is an action that is absent harm and promotes good, and good is like the beauty of the
sun’s rays across the rolling countryside in the early morning, you'll know it
when you see it. Goodness resides innately in humans and evil arises from circumstances. Morals are a code to promote circumstance absent evil and an
environment where good can flourish.
No comments:
Post a Comment