Daily we are faced with the challenge of deciding what behavior will best approximate moral behavior. In previous blogs I have shared various definitions of what might be considered moral behavior. Saying that it is kind or good behavior obviously is not helpful. What might seem kind for one person or part of Mother Nature may have a negative effect on some other person or part of Mother Nature.
Just this morning I read about or observed:
o The conviction and sentencing of many individuals for behaviors such as “not protecting a child” from an abusive partner. Is it moral to punish someone who is caught in an abusive relationship or to ignore the fact that we know that hurt people hurt each other?
o The conviction of individuals for stealing or attempting to steal various goods. Is it moral to punish certain thieves or to narrowly define what constitutes theft?
o The shooting of someone attempting to steal. Is it moral to consider the life of another less important than property?
o The enormous profit margin of such companies as Amazon while many employees struggle to survive on $16.00 an hour or less. Is it moral to purchase goods from such a company just because it is often cheaper and easier to order from them?
o A game between two teams of adult men which we know will likely cause or add to the possibility that some of the players will suffer traumatic brain injury which could also result in harm to other people. Is it moral to support such games? If we support such games are we complicit in any harm which comes to the players or those who are harmed because of the brain injury of the players?
o The procurement and sales of drugs which will, at the very least, feed the addiction of others and most likely cause or contribute to the brain dysfunction which will lead to the harm of others. Is the addiction or attachment to profit regardless of who it negatively affects moral for the drug dealer, the pharmaceutical company whose primary motive is profit, or the company which is selling unhealthy products?
o The arrest of and possible conviction of an adult who had sex with a teenager who willingly and enjoyably participated in a sexual relationship. It is moral to convince a teenager that they are a victim of illegal and immoral behavior just because the behavior offends the arbitrary age limit a community has set?
o Sexual touching of a young child. Is it immoral and illegal because it’s harming the child or because the community has decided that the child is not supposed to feel sexual pleasure from an adult until a certain age? If the touching was part of the rituals of a culture, would it still be immoral? What person or groups should decide if certain sexual behavior is immoral?
o The use of individual plastic containers for sandwiches in a park cafe. The park is designed and is a wonderful, healthy alternative for family members to sitting indoors and watching television. Plastic containers and the use of plastic straws are likely not biodegradable. The manufacture and use of such products contribute to a wide range of harm to the environment, fish and other animals. Is it moral to patronize the restaurant; to allow one’s taxes to be used for the upkeep of the park; to patronize the cafe? Can one morally patronize the cafe if one does not insist on no plastic containers or straws? What about the plastic lid on the cup of coffee I ordered?
Obviously, if one is going to live in this community, one could easily be unable to function if one is going to be absolutely sure that one is always being a moral person; that one is not engaging in any behavior which is potentially harmful to another person, animal or any part of Mother Nature. Yet, we must, if this planet is to survive or if we are to do all we can to prevent direct and indirect harm to each other, ask these very tough questions. Daily life is less complicated and stressful if we only have to be concerned with ourselves, our immediate life journey or can act as if our ethical or religious beliefs trump the thoughts and beliefs of others. Life is less stressful if we convince ourselves that the environmentalists are wrong; that individual parents always knows what is best; that legitimate profiteering which promotes a healthy economy is moral whereas individual stealing or forced sharing of resources is immoral; that some are more deserving of health care; that some can posit a concept a god who can dictate sexual behavior for procreation only; that punishment or mistreatment of others will lead to a more empathic society.
Philosophers, theologians, artists and other “misfits” are frequently the ones who challenged community leaders and the gods that they posit to question the morality of the rules and the laws. Without these challenges communities are destined to continue to destroy each other physically, emotionally and spiritually. Without such challenges communities are doomed to work against each other instead of with each other. Without these challenges can we claim to approximate morality?
Written February 17, 2022
Jimmy F Pickett
coachpickett.org