It's high time we start asking questions around here.
We have a bad habit of acting now and asking questions never. Inquiry brings us closer to knowing, and, let's face it, knowing is nearly the entire battle.
The beauty of asking questions is that we generate new questions, bigger questions. We get closer to the truth. Remember that old girl? Yes, she's still around, and yes, you can look her up, but you have to find her number first.
Truth isn't easy, and she has a delicate way of slapping you in the face. She makes you a better person, though, and you know that. So let's start asking some questions.
***
Any proper discussion of morality includes the reasons behind morals, and potentially more important, where those morals come from. We often follow a set of unspoken rules because they just feel right. But where do these rules come from? What is morality, from a secular perspective? Could morality be picked up through osmosis, observing others and copying their emotions? Is morality something deeper, something instinctual, that drives us all the same conclusions about what is wrong and what is right? Perhaps, if morality is ultimately genetic, different genetic backgrounds might experience different behavioral tendencies.
Should individuals be judged within the context of their societies, or by one's own moral code? Is morality rigid as it applies to different cultures and times, or should the moral standard by which we judge individuals change with the passage of time and a difference in culture?
Thomas Jefferson authored the Constitution of the United States, holding within the pen-strokes leaps and bounds forward in equality and personal liberty. Simultaneously, Jefferson owned slaves and a plantation, and was willing to compromise to keep slavery on the shores of the New World. Was Jefferson immoral for holding slaves, and did he see his "possession" of others as immoral himself? We can easily conclude that slavery in itself is immoral by modern standards. When we consider the individual, however, how can we judge their morality when their actions were considered the norm in their time-frame?
Variety is the spice of life. This world is full of different cultures and viewpoints that enlivens perspective and discussion. That said, how are we to judge the actions of Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby who, for all intents and purposes, is a follower of the social norms of 1920s New York City. He does not deviate, showing neither higher nor lower morals than any of the degenerates with which he lived. Is Carraway immoral, or simply morally average in his context? To understand his motivations, we have to assume his actions in good faith; otherwise, his value as a character would be indecipherable.
Morality is not an easy topic about which to write. Numerous conflicting theories of morality trickle into conversation. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a pantheist who does not seek moral approval from a higher power, but rather sees morality as a personal quest that individuals have to undertake by themselves.
***
This topic piques my interest because of my own journey of moral discovery. I find myself asking "Why?" far too often, more than is comfortable for most around me. I can't help this nature of mine: question everything, with attempts at being indiscriminate. This admittedly does not win me too many friends, but those who stick around are able to help me discover my answers.
I went through a crisis of sorts when I realized that I was not Christian. I was raised one, as many are, and through trial and error it turned out I did not believe. The question I was left with was this: why do I still feel the need to be a good person? How can I still make judgments on right and wrong, when I have no scripture to reinforce my views? The more research I did into the subject, the more I realized that the interpretations of what is "moral" varies from place to place, time to time. Segregation of women in Saudi Arabia is not immoral, but to us in Western culture, it most definitely is. So how do we determine which is the right way to treat women, and which is the wrong way? Should be judge every Saudi man who scolds his wife for taking off her head-covering in public, even when this upholds his own moral values?
Does morality come down to the mind of the observer, and what gives that observer the right to be "right"?