[Cin]

The term morality always made me a little uncomfortable. I believe my problem was that I always equated morality with judgment.

I remember reading the short story “The Monkey’s Paw” in class when I was a kid. I’m most likely suspicious by nature but that story didn’t help...sneaky, tricky, stuff in that story. It showed me how a thing that seems like something good can turn out to be really bad. Sometimes what you think you want will hurt you. Anyway right around that same time I was learning about the 8 beatitudes in catechism. They scared the crap out of me. I didn’t find the promises in them all that comforting. They seemed like traps. Like the Monkey’s Paw was a trap. I read evil intent by a god that confused and frightened me deeply in the words “Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice for they shall have their fill.” I decided right then that I did not want my fill of justice, nope, not hungry for it, not thirsty for it, nope. I figured maybe I’d hang my hat on mercy. Sounded like a better prize in the end anyway.

As an adult I still had problems conflating morality and judgment. I won’t bore you here with my process. Suffice to say that I have come to believe adopting a moral point of view is essential. I don’t have to judge people to do that. I do judge their actions when their actions affect others. For me that is the measure. When someone’s actions are going to have consequences for others then they must consider that and take responsibility for making ethical decisions based on this knowledge. But if they don’t make the just and moral decision then it is my right to call them on it. It often doesn’t take a lot of thought to figure out what decision is the just and moral one. Not everything, actually hardly anything, is a moral dilemma. To be right thinking one just needs to make choices with the measuring stick of equity for all human beings in mind. Perhaps even all sentient beings.

History shows that a significant number of humans do not believe human beings have the inclination to be moral. They do not believe human beings are likely to make moral decisions based on the reality that to do so would improve the quality of life in a society. Many believe people will put their needs above the needs of others and do what was best for themselves, regardless of the result for others or for all humankind. I guess this is where religion came into play as well as other social institutions to help us find other reasons besides justice, understanding and empathy for making moral choices.

I do think human beings have the capacity to make the right moral decisions simply because they are the right ones for everyone concerned and not because god is watching us or because we will go to jail if we don’t. Our big brains evolved for adaptation but we got some extra stuff too. Being able to understand and anticipate the consequences of our actions, being able to make value judgments, as well as possessing the ability to choose between alternative courses of action means to me that we can make the correct moral decisions. We can choose between what is best for the individual and what is best for the whole. We can conclude that what is best for our society is ultimately what is best for the individual. However, as Dreadgeek pointed out so well, people often lack the information or refuse the information required to make the right choice. Many lack the ability or desire for critical thinking. As a society we are not only intellectually lazy, we are morally lethargic.

I just think the litmus test for moral behavior is whether or not it is fair and whether or not you would be comfortable if everyone chose that particular behavior. There should be equity for all involved in any action or decision. Equity and justice need to be the prime motivators in concluding what choice is the moral one.