Ever Deepening | |
|
|
Morality and Ethics...The word expansionimplies change that can only be evaluated by those enmeshed in the culture defined by an ethical system. They should frequently ask themselves: are we becoming more powerful? If not, why not? If the cause is beyond their control, they should immediately ask, "what needs to change in our ethical system to rectify the loss of power?" From this perspective, the turn to Christian ethics (the word "morality" is incorrect) at the end of the 20th century was not an entirely irrational response to events. It was simply an ineffective response. A return to older ethical systems (e.g. - "Abortion is a mortal sin") is usually an ineffective response to social dysfunction, particularly when the code was changed through an orderly social process. Orderly change usually occurs as a response to a real social need. Furthermore, fundamentalist rhetoric also undermines the process of individual adaptation to changing times: few of us have abortions, kill people, or must decide the fate of a loved one in a persistent vegetative state. Focusing attention on these issues turns our attention from the critical business of understanding how I need to change to restore the vitality seeping from society. It is a dictum of human nature that we will change our beliefs before we change our behavior. Our definition of morality leads us out of that trap, by focusing our attention on how our ethics affect the community, rather than on how well they serve us. Self-love is a very limited engagement. No matter how much we attempt to love ourselves, we will never succeed in matching the power generated through engagement with a community of people we love, and that loves us in return. The growing complexity of our cultural context also frustrates our ability to isolate and respond to ethical impediments. Changing an ethic implies a reallocation of power. Our moral impulse is to accomplish that reallocation only when a positive change will result. Unfortunately, almost every social process serves some constituency, if only those employed for its implementation. In almost every situation, some individual or group of individuals is going to lose when the change is made. The definition of morality I have provided does not require us to respond to every such claim. If the need for ethical change is obvious, the balance will be clearly to the greater benefit of the society as a whole, releasing energy that will ultimately provide opportunities for those bearing the brunt of change. In that situation, those being asked to change might see a benefit in negotiating a transition program, rather than resisting change entirely. |
|
| |