Welcome to the 'It's All About Me' show
So, this isn't directly about religion, but since my worldview colors how I see things, I can't help but ask myself: Why we can't seem to keep our hands to ourselves in terms of attacking and hitting others and if it is any reflection on how we see the world? Afterall, the idea of keeping our hands to ourselves is one of the things we were supposed to take away from pre school and kindergarten. And, really, don't we already know objectively, that it's wrong to let our fists fly on others?
Take this story about the reporter being attacked:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/07/reporter.attacked.ap/index.html.
Of course, this is particularly bothersome to me because, well, I'm a reporter. And the threat of bodily harm, especially when working on sensitive topics, is always a concern. While I've never been physically attacked, I've been screamed at, hung up on, had doors slammed in my face and sworn at. And, of course, I've always kept my cool in return!
Anyway, take, too, the recent incident of the coach tackling the kid playing football on an opposing team. The kid was called for a late hit for the tackling the opposing coach's son, the quarterback. Now, instead of adults merely attacking each other at sporting events, we've got them going after the kids too! What the heck?!?
How is it that we can't control ourselves? Could it be that since we, as a society, tend to think that morals are subjective rather than objective, I can ultimately decide for myself how to conduct myself instead of measuring myself against an ultimate objective good? Subjective morality basically lets us all decide what's good for us, even if it entails tackling a 14-year-old kid and beating the crap out of him. And, really, the culture at large cannot even tell us that its set of standards are the objective because who in the culture gets to decide what the standard is? Is it the majority? But why is your standard any more valid than my standard of morals and conduct? And if the majority decides that sacrificing all first-born 2-year-old males to the God Whatsamajigger, is that really alright? Um .... hmmm .... NO! How do I know that? Morality is objective. If I want to punch you in the face, why exactly is that wrong if our internal system of morality is based on the subjective? It seems to me that when you move from an objective moral standard to a subjective moral standard, then you get people acting the way they've been taught to act: basing their actions on how they feel rather than on what is truly right and wrong. You get people maliciously tackling kids, attacking reporters, "road rage" and a myriad of other scary offenses toward each other.
I don't know about any one else out there, but when someone tells me to just 'do what feels right,' I bristle. If I based all of my actions on what felt "right" during a fleeting moment, my life would be a complete wreck! I'd definitely be overweight, I would be sexually promiscuous, I would likely have killed several people who've ticked me off for various reasons and I'd be so far in debt you'd have to dig to China to get me out of the hole. Subjectivity just doesn't play out in real life. We just don't 'do what feels right' all the time because we're thinking, rational humans who understand the consequences of our actions. And how do we understand the consequences? Not only through trial and error or by example, I contend, but through objective standards outside of ourselves and outside of society.
I say we start a new advertising campaign: 'Before you do what feels right, think about it.' But I guess that's just not as pithy as 'It's all about me.'
Take this story about the reporter being attacked:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/07/reporter.attacked.ap/index.html.
Of course, this is particularly bothersome to me because, well, I'm a reporter. And the threat of bodily harm, especially when working on sensitive topics, is always a concern. While I've never been physically attacked, I've been screamed at, hung up on, had doors slammed in my face and sworn at. And, of course, I've always kept my cool in return!
Anyway, take, too, the recent incident of the coach tackling the kid playing football on an opposing team. The kid was called for a late hit for the tackling the opposing coach's son, the quarterback. Now, instead of adults merely attacking each other at sporting events, we've got them going after the kids too! What the heck?!?
How is it that we can't control ourselves? Could it be that since we, as a society, tend to think that morals are subjective rather than objective, I can ultimately decide for myself how to conduct myself instead of measuring myself against an ultimate objective good? Subjective morality basically lets us all decide what's good for us, even if it entails tackling a 14-year-old kid and beating the crap out of him. And, really, the culture at large cannot even tell us that its set of standards are the objective because who in the culture gets to decide what the standard is? Is it the majority? But why is your standard any more valid than my standard of morals and conduct? And if the majority decides that sacrificing all first-born 2-year-old males to the God Whatsamajigger, is that really alright? Um .... hmmm .... NO! How do I know that? Morality is objective. If I want to punch you in the face, why exactly is that wrong if our internal system of morality is based on the subjective? It seems to me that when you move from an objective moral standard to a subjective moral standard, then you get people acting the way they've been taught to act: basing their actions on how they feel rather than on what is truly right and wrong. You get people maliciously tackling kids, attacking reporters, "road rage" and a myriad of other scary offenses toward each other.
I don't know about any one else out there, but when someone tells me to just 'do what feels right,' I bristle. If I based all of my actions on what felt "right" during a fleeting moment, my life would be a complete wreck! I'd definitely be overweight, I would be sexually promiscuous, I would likely have killed several people who've ticked me off for various reasons and I'd be so far in debt you'd have to dig to China to get me out of the hole. Subjectivity just doesn't play out in real life. We just don't 'do what feels right' all the time because we're thinking, rational humans who understand the consequences of our actions. And how do we understand the consequences? Not only through trial and error or by example, I contend, but through objective standards outside of ourselves and outside of society.
I say we start a new advertising campaign: 'Before you do what feels right, think about it.' But I guess that's just not as pithy as 'It's all about me.'
posted by Jeno at
1:12 PM
3 Comments:
There is certainly a problem when otherwise normally functioning, intelligent adults in our society fly into these rages. It is completely unnacceptable, and you would think that more people would stand up and ask what in the world is going on here!?!? I agree with your observations about subjective morality. If there is no objective standard, then anything that seems right or feels right to me goes. The Ted Bundys of the world and other psychopathic serial killers demonstrate horifically the logical and extreme outcomes of subjective standards of morality.
By
Anonymous, at 7:04 PM
We're an enraged society...why?
By
Anonymous, at 12:21 PM
It seems to me we've become more and more enraged because the majority of us believe that everything revolves around us - the "I" comes first, instead of trying to put each other first over ourselves. My thoughts are that if most people would put others above themselves, we wouldn't have this type of rage against each other.
By
Anonymous, at 4:13 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home