Friday, October 19, 2012

Ethics. Who needs 'em....

I've got some thoughts floating around. Real good ones. Let's get started.

I think we can all agree that every person has some sense of what is right, and what is wrong. A person may have a very skewed view of right and wrong, but at least everyone has some sense of morality. And ever since humans have had these views of right and wrong, they have been arguing over who's set of rules is right. And that is why we have so many ethical systems. Let's review a couple of these.

Divine Command Theory-- This ethical theory states that right and wrong are based on what God likes and dislikes; what he commands and forbids. So, if this is true, an act is neither right nor wrong unless God has said something about it.

Individualism-- This is the idea that right and wrong is based around what any one individual decides. This one kind of sucks. But still, it's out there, and I thought I'd present it for your ridicule.

Hedonism-- The idea that right and wrong is determined by pleasure and pain. What is good, is what brings pleasure. What is bad is what causes pain. If this assumption is correct, there is a lot of discussion to be had over how to start applying it. But think on this if you want.

Utilitariansim-- With this theory, actions are right if and only if they lead to greater good for a greater number of people than any alternative action. Again, this leaves us open to lots of discussion. But, there it is.

Kant-- Not totally sure on this one, but I am pretty sure Kant believes that actions are right or wrong in and of themselves. There are rules that we must follow, and the rules must not be broken in any situation. Something like that.

Okay...there are some theories. I don't care which you chose to believe. If you don't like any of them, I can give you some more to mull over. But, having put those in your mind, I'd like to transition now into meta-ethical territory. What is good? Where does it come from? I am going to talk about a couple things now. If at any point you disagree, please put your opinion in the comments. I will read it. Also, if you are aware of any relevant research, please direct me to it.

Regardless of what moral theory you hold, you have to cede that every person on Earth learned morality from their parents and the society they were raised in. I think it is wrong to challenge you to a duel to the death. However, in the past, that was perfectly acceptable. Even encouraged, in some situations. And this is simply a product of society. Of course, not all of morality is specific to individual cultures. Much of morality overlaps across the majority of civilization and history. For example, it is almost always wrong to kill someone for no reason at all. But where does this come from?

When I look at the very root of things, I don't really find a reason why something is bad. What I end up seeing is that we don't like something, so we called it bad. Then we taught all our kids it was bad, and now the whole world thinks it is bad to disrespect your elders.

The question I want you to all think about is this: What makes something good or bad?

I know some of you are going to be divine command theorists, and tell me that God said so, and that's that. But why did God say it was wrong for me to use your femur as an axe handle? I want someone to explain to me the source of right and wrong. Is it something ephemeral that exists in dark energy of the universe? Something we tune into as we grow older? What caused that? Why are some things right, and some things wrong?

And, if you can't explain this to me, or simply don't care to, then tell me what ethical code do you adhere to? What set of rules do you use to determine the right or wrongness of your actions?

4 comments:

  1. It's late, and i have to get up to go to Moab in 4 hours, but i wanted to chime in.
    I'm just gonna skip by the philosophy discussion though, and get to the question you asked.
    I guess i feel that right and wrong aren't really as important as existing in or out of phase with the universe, with matter, reality, other beings. That sounds kind of new-age and absurd but i mean it in a very real, intra-personal and applicable away, and also just in terms of existing in harmony with the natural world on earth, and the invisible world.
    When we choose action or thought that put us in friction with or in phase against that Harmony, we disrupt, destroy, disorganize, limit others or cause potential growth to go to waste. I think we use words like "that's bad!" and such to explain to our kids this idea, or what we think is the idea, and we do a pretty imperfect job of it, all telling different versions. And so we just struggle on to find our way and learn what "It" is.
    We've all been taught by other voices or by experience what the right way to go on is, but we all are off to our own degree in and in our own way. When i was younger, i thought if i did something unacceptable to another, that avoiding it or lying about it would help me evade consequence. I guess you could call that a hedonism of sorts. But i gradually came to understand that i am not tricking anyone with that, and i'm just denying the other person knowledge and resolution, and justice. So i decided that being honest and accounting were the "right" things for me to do, or, the "right" way to carry myself.
    I think i could spin a few different versions of what i am trying to type out here, fitting it into each of your mentioned philosophies for fun, but i'm pretty exhausted and i don't want to spend ten minutes on this.
    Thanks for the thought-provoking questions, though.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well... I can't explain the why and whats that you are asking for Dan, so I'll answer the last two questions. I have a feeling that I am a little mix of Divine Command Theory and Individualism. Why? Well, my whole life has been based around my religion and believing in the commandments of God and His views of right and wrong. However, being mortal and human, I have been given my agency and thus, when I don't find a specific godly perception on a choice I have to make or something that I have experienced, etc, then it is down to me to decide whether I feel it is good or bad. Of course, my judgement might not be the same as the next person's but I like to mull over the thoughts of the Hero versus the Villain. We give them those names based on how we perceive them (or are trained to perceive them) but what about themselves? I'm sure the villain doesn't think he's bad or in the wrong... you know? :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Djambi, the chocolate icing. (Clap, clap) Very good blog entry Daniel although this is how I was finally able to understand Kant's views on Deontology- To act in a morally right way, people must act from duty. It’s not the consequences of actions that make them right or wrong but the motives of the person who carries out the action. For something to be the highest type of good it must be both good in itself and good without qualification. Most things that are considered to be good fail at either being good in itself or being good without qualification. Deontology is a very deep and seemingly difficult thing to understand, but it distills down to a person acting by good will alone, through that good will is the only way that an action can be right.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really appreciate these thoughts. I've been wanting to write a similar one, because I've had similar thoughts, but they were in no way organized in my head. I like how you throw away individualism, because so many "right and wrong" questions deal with people, not just ourselves. But the problem is that no matter what take on ethics we accept, each person decides for him/herself which code of ethics to adopt. It seems like with that in mind, ethics are something that exists only in our minds. I'm persuaded to believe that ethics are created, either by man or God. Aaaaand before I know it I'm going to be writing too lengthy of a response, so maybe I'll save the gist of it for my own blog. Thanks for starting the conversation!

    ReplyDelete