Human beings are, both literally and metaphorically, upright creatures - or so it seems. Most people are inherently 'good' (that is to say. not completely evil). Religion and rule-of-law dictate that we be fair and just, and generally harmless to the people around us. And it is believed that we are hard-wired to be 'moral' and to "do the right thing” whenever possible.
But let's leave aside religion and law for a moment because, like it or not, both are man-made constructs. They exist simply because we want them to. Whatever you might believe in, the fact remains that religious texts were written by men – mere mortals. The word of God, for instance, was eventually penned by four guys. The Buddhist canon was passed down orally from generation to generation until it was finally written down by ordinary monks long after the time of the Buddha. It is not far fetched to suggest that the original message might have gotten a little distorted somewhere down the line. But I digress.
In the context of human evolution, I suppose it makes sense for people to be 'moral', because that's probably what's best for us as a species. Humans are, after all, social creatures; and we have been living together as families/groups/tribes/nations for at least 50,000 years now, and in that respect, I guess it's better to coexist peacefully, looking out for one another, rather than coveting thy neighbour's wife – among other things.
But that was not how things turned out in the end now, was it?
For over 200 generations we humans have been waging wars, stealing food and money, raping women, pillaging entire villages, and slaughtering others of our own kind just because we could. Dictators like Adolf Hitler and Pol Pot, and countless others before them, have put paid to the lives of millions of "innocent" people for the mind-bogglingly simple reason that they just – didn't – like – them. And now, political soothsayers warn us, the prospect of a global nuclear holocaust is pretty high – especially if America continues to PMS the way it does. In such a context, what's the point of a concept as vague and ambiguous as morality?
It certainly hasn’t helped prevent war and full-scale destruction over the centuries. And it’s clear that people will eventually choose to forego what’s right and moral for the “greater good” (another term for “whatever that will keep me and my friends alive”). Most people, whether they like to admit it or not, will do anything for survival – anything at all. ‘Survival of the fittest’ is law.
So, then, why bother with morality at all? What ever for? Is it because we want to pretend to be something we’re not? Or is it that it really does help in the short term (or in the long run, even)? Or is it because of some irrational fear that being immoral will guarantee you a one-way ticket to hell? Or is it simply because we’re aware of our own mortality and vulnerability, and therefore want to, nay need to appease our delicate little conscience?
Is it “moral” to even question it?
|
E-mail
