What a bloody brain fry. The issue of morality and ethics is
complete brain fry. The fun bit is that people with the least knowledge have the
highest volume of opinion on the same. This is a topic fraught with so much controversy
and it requires some amount of deep thinking to come to any conclusion on the
same. In any case I don’t think one can come to any conclusion as regards the
same. It can only be a matter of opinion at a given point of time. What on
earth are morals? They themselves have changed over a period of time with the
bar on what is acceptable constantly changing. The views change depending upon
your religion and orientation. Everything is so subjective… and then we have
this taught in schools by the teachers who all think moral science is so dam
easy. Take care of your parents, respect the elders, speak the truth and don’t ---
don’t practically everything you enjoy doing.
To my mind most of the moral science classes were taken by
the class teacher or the teacher with an hour to spare. Science and math were
probably the hep subjects with those teachers being the rock stars. Moral
science teacher being a rock star? That one was the simple one with a stupid
workbook to solve. Most of the teachers who are used to teaching that there is
one answer to a solution were ill equipped to teach the changing nature of
moral climate and the complete dynamic nature of it interpretation. I am sure
no moral science teacher would have even heard about, leave alone dared to
teach about the trolley problem. The trolley problem in its simplicity is as
below but there are many various levels to it, which can be found online.
Google them.
“There are two basic
trolley problems. The first problem, invented by a philosopher called Philippa
Foot, is that a trolley is going to kill five people on the rails. The question
is whether you should turn the trolley onto another set of tracks on a spur where
there is just one person. So you can save five lives at the cost of one life.
Almost everyone, when you ask them that question, says you should do that and
kill the one person.
Another moral
philosopher called Judith Jarvis Thomson came up with another trolley problem,
the “fat man” problem. The trolley is going along as before, and is going to
kill five people. But this time you’re on a footbridge, and you can stop the
train by pushing a fat man onto the tracks, who is so large that his bulk will
stop the train and save the five lives. The question, again, is whether you
should save five lives by sacrificing one. But 90% of people think it’s wrong
to push the fat man.”
I got this from an interview
I was reading today. It was quite an interesting one and I would recommend it
for all. http://www.salon.com/2012/12/26/when_is_it_ethical_to_kill_somone/
.
As a young kid I had a very simple approach to moral
science. Like most idiots I too had a black and white approach to it. And I think
that was encouraged and appreciated. You should always speak the truth; you
should always blah blah… and so on. The basic principal being that there are
one set of moral values that are universal and all pervasive. Some things are wrong
and some things are right. Full stop. Moral Science is not a place for debate.
As I learnt much much later at my own cost and on my own experience –things are
not so simple.
Today morning at the swimming pool we saw a crow dipping a ‘ghatia’,
(fried snack), in the water and then eating it. a lot of people have takent o feeding
crows in Mumbai and the popular choice is ghatias. With me were two very
religious Jain friends. My view is that feeding a scavenger home made fried
food was a little out of line. The topic moved to the various well meaning ‘kabutar
khanas’ in the cities. At these places, religious folks buy grain and feed them
to the free pigeons. While giving them life, some research believes that this
is causing an upset in the circle of life and causing the sparrow population to
dwindle. Hah! Tell that to the well-meaning Jain folks coming out of the temple
and doing their good deed for the day. Ethics have a similar ripple effect. There
are millions of unintended and unimagined consequences of what we do and the
actions we take.
Debate becomes the most important point of this thinking. Everything
must be preceded by an internal debate in your mind. What is right and what is
wrong. Under what circumstances has the action been taken before we sit to pass
judgment? We require a cool head, deep introspection an open mind and a belief
in the subjectivity of things to take a final call. This is possibly too much to
ask for. I wonder why?
Currently given the fast pace of life at work and in
personal life, pace is given priority over measure. And I have no issues with
that. I too am a firm believer in pace. What’s the point of being paralyzed by analysis?
But decision does not mean end of debate. I am not saying that subjectivity
should slow you down, only that recognizing that subjectivity is present will
help you think better, build bridges and open your mind.
But forget that. I think all this is too much to ask for in
anyone, including myself. The philosophy at its extreme almost questions
everything that we take for real, including the holy grail of the love that the
mother has for a child. How did I lead here – well that’s for another day. But if
you build the argument in your head, you can question everything, find a motive
behind everything and question every action. Forget. It’s too much to think.
Right now also my head is reeling under all these questions.
For me the simple answer is subjectivity. There is no truth, no absolute truth
and no set of codified laws written on tablets to be followed. Sue your own
moral compass. Do what you think is right. At that time. At that moment.
Understand the moral principles governing society, and choose what you want to
do. Do you want to be a rebel and turn them around or do you want to quietly cede
ground or do you want to live in a duality. How people do you want to offend
and how many do you want not be pissed off? I don’t think these questions were
asked of us in moral science class. In fact no bloody question was asked. We
were simply told what is right and what is wrong. I wish it was so dam simple.
