|
|
|
|
|
A new definition of morality can be found a little later in this essay. First let's look at common definitions gleaned from various dictionaries:
1. The quality of being in
accord with standards of right or good conduct.
2. A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct.
3. Virtuous conduct.
The word morality comes from the Latin "moralitas," which has to do with character or proper behavior. It refers to the concept of proper human action in terms of "right and wrong," also referred to as "good and evil." Many more specific definitions of morality can be found, and the concept easily overlaps with and is in certain contexts synonymous with ethics, principles, virtue, and goodness.
For some, morality is simply a declaration of rules and beliefs that are considered absolute guides for human behavior. This view doesn't allow for individuals to disagree or for the possibility that other groups are correct in their differing views. The basic premise is, "This is the moral system handed down to us, and any who disagree with it or act outside of its rules are evil, mistaken or ignorant."
Of course, morality has become a complicated issue in modern times, primarily because of the greater mixing of cultures and religions, each with its own ideas about good and evil. In fact, another definition of morality is "a system of principles and judgments based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans determine whether given actions are right or wrong." As such, it becomes relativistic, with little meaning outside of the "group" which shares a common set of moral principles. Thus, we end up with a "Christian morality," a "Buddhist morality," and so on.
Apart from outside systems and rules such as the "ten commandments" of the Bible or the five moral precepts of the Pancha Shila, there is also a personal morality we each can arrive at as individuals. There are two common ways this is approached. The first is a relative morality, as in "what is moral for you may not be moral for me." With this view, two people can differ in their moral code and both be right.
The other kind of personal morality considers right and wrong to be absolute and outside of us, but with each individual responsible for discovering the "truth" to the best of his or her abilities. With this view, when two people have differing moral rules or beliefs, one has to be wrong. In other words, moral truths are absolute, but some people are "closer to that truth" than others, and we each have to think and act on our own understanding.
Therefore, there are at least four common approaches to morality:
1. Absolute and given to us
to obey. (An authority decides what is right.)
2. Relativistic and by common cultural agreement. (The group
decides what is right.)
3. Relativistic and a personal choice. (I invent right and wrong.)
4. Absolute and for each individual to discover. (I try my best
to discover what is right.)
One flaw in these approaches is the invented dichotomy of "absolute" and "relative" morality. Consider a relativistic position like "It can be right to steal, if it prevents your child from starving." It is opposed to the absolutist position that "Stealing is always wrong," but it is not opposed at all to the idea that morality is determined by absolutes. There can be some absolute moral value (maybe life?), which makes lower values important only relative to how well they serve this primary value in a given context.
The absolute facts of a given situation can be used along with the relative values involved to determine what is right. Stealing food when unnecessary may be wrong normally, and yet the absolute fact "you have to eat to live," along with the relative importance of eating right now, might make stealing the moral thing to do in some contexts. Therefore a morality can be relativistic in one sense, while still recognizing that some truths are absolute.
Another problem is that the various definitions of morality really describe different things. This is a common problem with all language. We have to choose which concept a word is meant to name before we can properly define it. "love," for example, is actually several concepts that are all using the same name, making it very confusing.
My own approach to this is to look for the reason a word is necessary, and how it came to be. This leads us to the most important concept. In considering morality, then, we ask, "Why do we have this word?" and "Where did the concept come from?" These questions get us to a clearer definition of morality.
Continued here: What Is Morality?