RECENT POSTS IN THIS series have dealt with the question of morality, and its relation to the main problem we each face at our spiritual center—that part of us which struggles to discover how to go about being a human.
Those posts pointed out that each of us has been taught, in one way or another, that:
- We are intrinsically defective, that
- We need moral guidance to keep from being naturally bad, and that
- The essence of morality is obedience to some master.
In some cases the "master" is a parent, in some cases a superior officer, in some an employer or a policeman or God (as relayed to us by the leaders of our particular religion), but in each case our role is servant or slave or subject to an external authority.
This is the moral theory invented ten to twelve thousand years ago by priests and kings, which was the foundation of all those magnificent civilizations where those who commanded got to live extremely well, while those who obeyed got to do the hard work.
Recognizing this fact led us to two other questions about morality:
- Do we need morality at all, or would we be better off if everyone simply acted in their own best interest?
- If we do need morality, then is there another model of morality than that endorsed by kings, priests, employers, and other slave-makers?
Last time we answered the first question by pointing out that it was impossible for human beings to function without some kind of moral element—that we cannot get through a day without asking questions about what we "should" or "ought to" do, or without considering the effect of our actions on others.
This brings us to the second question.
Is there another model of morality, besides the one designed to make us good slaves, which is closer to the truth about human nature?
There is, and the clue to understanding it is the very fact that we can't get through the day without making moral judgments.
Morality is simply a part of being human.
This is the key thing to understand: morality isn't some cure for an essential flaw in humanity, imposed by an authority or even by ourselves in order to make up for our "bad" tendencies—it's a fundamental part of humanity, of who we are, a part of our basic nature.
To be human is, in large part, to be a moral creature.
Humans don't have to be taught to be concerned about the welfare of others, to value fairness and equality and loyalty and respect and truth—we just do.
This is so true, such a fundamental fact about humans, that most of the worst things we do—as well as most of the best—are done for moral reasons.
Why did a handful of fanatics fly airplanes into the world trade center?
Because they believed it was the right thing to do.
Why have so many doctors at abortion clinics been hurt or assassinated recently?
On moral grounds.
Why do Republicans risk bankrupting the country so that a handful of super-wealthy individuals can save a few percentages in income tax?
Because it's a moral issue for them.
If you ask a gang member why he did a drive-by shooting, or a wife beater why he beat his wife you will most often get a moral reason.
"They were infringing on our territory (our rights)", "she wasn't properly obedient", "taxes are confiscation of rightful property", "abortion doctors are murderers", "we were serving God".
Book-burning, torture, cheating, lying, stealing, war, murder, and all the other dangerous and stupid things humans do are not only condemned for moral reasons, but are also done for moral reasons.
Which leads us to a paradoxical question: maybe we can't help being moral creatures—but is morality really a good thing?
Next: Three false paths, and a way forward...
