Morality

What is your relationship with morality? Do you find yourself wondering if something is right? Do you do what you know you should?

While the facts may inform our decisions, they don’t seem to tell us which decisions to make. Science may help you sleep better, but it can’t tell you why you should get out of bed. This all relates to a point of contention among philosophers, an argument made famous by David Hume: You can't get an OUGHT from an IS.

I had an experience as a Kindergarten teacher that made this problem clear to me. I had a few students who saw no problem with telling the occasional lie. To help point out how dishonesty can lead to unintended (and sometimes terrible) consequences, I told the story of the Boy who Cried Wolf.

The dramatic ending didn’t sit well with the kindergarteners, leading many to quiet and careful contemplation. Afterward, one of my students asked, “Is the story about the boy and the wolf true?”

What a question! The sentiment of it certainly is, the lesson or moral of it was “true,” or at least helpful in sharing the importance of the development of a certain virtue. But was it “literally true?” Was it a fact of history?

“What do you think?” was my answer. I wish my response was something more like, “It’s morally true.”

This demonstrates the need to recognize that truth has multiple parts. One’s epistemology should not only allow for the facts of reality. It must also allow for moral wisdom.

We can look at scientific fact like a sophisticated autopilot program. It can tell an airline pilot raw statistics about his altitude, fuel levels, and so forth. It may even give recommendations and warnings. But the pilot must make a decision about how to use that data. That calls to his sense of priorities, meaning, purpose, ethics, and other aspects of morality.

From whence does our morality come? Evolution has certainly gifted us with a proclivity for certain prosocial behaviors. Our societies have also influenced what we consider good choices or bad choices. We have already taken scientific facts into consideration, so we now turn to the world’s cultures, mythologies, and philosophies.

In part, The Truth is the best possible universally-applicable set of ethics informed by the greatest moral wisdom from across history, philosophy, mythology, and beyond. It is the “metaphorical truth.” It would be known by philosophers as the most sound value theory. It is the best answer to “How should one behave?” This is all summarized in our use of the term “Morality.”

In ages long past, something that was “true” only when it met some high standard or served a particular purpose. A “true axe” was sharp and cut well. An archer’s aim was “true” if their arrow reliably hit their intended target. Put another way, a true thing was fit for a particular purpose.

In the famous debates between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson, Morality (as a distinct part of the Truth) tends to align with Peterson’s definition of “truth.” It the highest possible set of meta-ethics imaginable. It is what calls us to be better.

Like the archaic usage, our model of the Truth is also a means to an end. But to what end? For our purposes, following the Truth can be thought of as performing the set of actions and choices that leads an individual to become the greatest possible version of themselves. It is the path to self-actualization, the course one should take in order to realize one’s greatest possible potential.

Each action we take comes with a set of consequences. When we desire an ideal set of consequences, we can then move forward to align our behaviors with those that (as far as we can tell) set us up for those outcomes. We need not reinvent the wheel. The lessons of history, the wisdom of philosophy, and even mythological teachings may all be explored to help us better understand what set of consequences can be reasonably linked with which behaviors.

On the larger scales of families, communities, society, humanity, and beyond, the Truth points us all toward an ideal future in which the greatest possible number of individuals are each able to self-actualize. It calls for the implementation of the political systems (whatever they may be) that actually result in the maximization of every individual’s ability to reach their greatest possible potential.

With that vision of a future worth forging, a moral system can thus be conceivably created and promoted, flowing coherently from this epistemology.

What we call “good” or “moral” can then be thought of as those behaviors which reasonably lead to the realization both of the individual’s greatest possible potential as well as the development of the society in which the greatest number may also realize their greatest potential.

Put another way, something is only “good” if it is good for the individual and good for society. If a situation emerges in which society is helped at the expense of the individual’s potential, it is not moral. If an individual is benefited at the expense of society, the behavior in question is not moral. It is only when both are benefited that our model is satisfied.

It should also be noted that there is no room in this value theory for what Thomas Paine calls “pious fraud,” “white lies,” or the mindset that “the ends justify the means.” Morality isn’t helped by compromising one’s morality. That is like going further into debt to pay off some debt, or demanding an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth!

Proper morality makes you a better person and improves society (incrementally as well as on the largest of scales). When we try to force the improvement of society through short-cuts or immoral half-measures, it often leads to untoward results. For example, the truth of small indiscretions tends to get out, undermining the progress made and poisoning the well for any future related discussion.