What Is Morality Why Should Society Be Moral At All - Essay Example

?What is Morality? Why should Society be Moral at all? The Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary defines the word ‘moral’ in its main entry as ‘relating to the standards of good behaviour, fairness, honesty etc. which each person believes in, rather than to laws’ and the word ‘morality’ refers to ‘a personal or social set of standards for good or bad behaviour and character, or the quality of being right, honest or acceptable’. ‘Society’ is ‘a large group of people who live together in an organized way, making decisions about how to do things and sharing the work that needs to be done’. It is interesting to note that the lexical definitions of the words ‘morality’ and ‘society’ begin not with the definite article (the) but with the indefinite article (a). It goes on to imply the limitations of their specificity. In other words, any discussion on an issue like morality is inherently bound to be highly subjective in nature and any effort to arrive at objective conclusions is utterly futile. But this could mean that there are at least some issues which allow total objectivity and that becomes a disputable statement if we consider Nietzsche’s observation that there is no such thing as an objective point of view, which means objectivity itself is a subjective matter. [“There is only a perspective seeing, only a perspective 'knowing'; and the more emotions we express over a thing, the more eyes, different eyes, we train on the same thing, the more complete will be our idea of that thing, our 'objectivity'.” (Nietzsche, 153)] The personal or social set of standards for good or bad behaviour that morality refers to, therefore, melts down to a mere set of one’s assumptions since there are no absolute truths and what we can have is only interpretations based on our needs and ability. We are living an age that has witnessed modernization and Westernization, appreciated dialectical materialism and is now going through a swift electronic revolution the boundaries of which are apparently beyond imagination for the moment. We are fascinated with wonder, exploration and adventure and its ripples are seen in the literature that is produced today as it does in the ‘Harry Potter’ series. The films produced by the Hollywood experiment with more and more graphics and technology. Not only in the production processes but also in the themes of films do we notice an ever-increasing obsession with technology if we take a careful look at the recent part of Hollywood’s journey from Spielberg’s Raiders of the Lost Ark to Cameroon’s Avatar. Even at this point of time, if humankind still continues to ponder over issues like morality and if there are still some directors interested in throwing light on how ‘sometimes good people do evil things’ (as the advertising tag of Sam Raimi’s 1998 film A Simple Plan reads) and if Michael Sandel’s discourse on justice has the potential to draw such huge crowds that it is rated among the most popular courses in Harvard’s history, it deserves careful consideration. It is a testimony to the fact that science’s takeover bid for the world does not mean a decline of our interest in morals and morality. The fundamental goal of a code of morality is to exercise control on the aspirations and deeds of individuals and groups. It is expected to be a deterrent. More than a century ago, W. W. Jacobs wrote the story The Monkey’s Paw (which opens with the caution: Be careful what you wish for. It might come true.) in which he skillfully embeds a very useful message in a seemingly horror story as to how our anxiety for quick or undeserving gains could have fatal consequences. It is this anxiety that prompts good people sometimes to do evil things. Thus, Sam Raimi’s A Simple Plan is more or less on the same lines as Jacob’s story. Capitalism, war, crime and corruption are all rooted in the desire to make a profit even if it is at the expense of someone else’s loss and if there is a code that could make everyone realize that prosperity is indivisible, the world would indeed be a much better place. There are people who have the apprehension that the rapid strides the world is making in science and technology have the potential to dilute values in the human society and that materialism, in due course, has the prospect of being able to override idealism . It is understandable on the ground that the human mind is by default resistant to and skeptical of anything and everything that is new. Nevertheless, it is possible to say that it could be the other way round. We may wonder if, in fact, the increasing role of science in our lives reinforces our need for and commitment to values. Else, how on earth would someone conceive a character and attitude like those of Timothy “Tim” Thomas, played by William Smith in Gabriele Muccino’s Seven Pounds (2008) in which the urge for remorse and atonement is the consequence of recklessness with an exotic Corvette Sting Ray during text messaging on a Blackberry? The plot of Seven Pounds revolves round a deep sense of guilt and conscience problems that eventually force the protagonist towards self-sacrifice to a shocking degree. Obviously, it is not out of a social or legal obligation. Rather it is self-imposed. Here was an Antonio who had no intention to plead for mercy. Quite on the contrary, he was only too willing to give away not just one but seven pounds of flesh though there was no Shylock that demanded it. If Tim wished, the accident would have ended up as just another hit-and-run case. If the legal course were to be followed, it would warrant, at best, a brief prison term. What kind of concerns then explain Tim’s decision to punish himself so severely? Evidently, it is his perspective of seeing fairness and honesty that not only convince him that he must atone but also give him the strength and courage to stand up for his decision so much so that he does not mind the horrific pain associated with the death he invites by getting stung by the his pet - extremely venomous - Box Jellyfish. By these acts of benevolence, the character of Tim is supposed to be established as one of great virtue. What else could be on Tim’s mind? What was he trying to prove – his moral character, his masculinity or his control over himself? It could be all of them. [“It appears to be a moral act, atonement for masculinity lost due to a failure to control himself and the immediate world around him, his masculine horizon of things and actions. If the Corvette was an extension of his own identity, he now makes the organs and tissues he can donate spare parts for other people.” (Passon, 94)] Moral values, of an individual or a group, as has been observed, are indeed based on assumptions and these assumptions derive from a desire to be acceptable, to be found acceptable. The word ‘acceptable’ has figured in the Cambridge definition of morality and the passive voice phrase in the previous sentence ‘to be found acceptable’ needs to be elaborated as to clarify acceptable to whom? As we see in Tim’s mental agony and conflict, the course of action he chose was to be acceptable to his own self. For him, it was a simple question of accountability. That is not say that what Tim did was what exactly he ought to have done. There are always multiple options and what he did was what he perceived as justice from his perspective. But without this accountability factor, the conditions in the society could be chaotic and that is where the value of morals comes in as an instrument that ensures equanimity. All said and done, Tim’s approach still leaves several questions unanswered. Did Tim have any idea about how good the people for whose deaths he held himself responsible were? Was his morality a reflection of his love for humanity or his love for himself? If it were for humanity, did he have to find an excuse that they were worthy of being helped? When he tried to judge people, could there be any love in it? Tim decides that he must die because he was guilty. In fact, the moment he felt guilty, he was (or he considered himself) morally dead. What remained was to complete the physical formality of that death with a sense of dutifulness. On the one hand, this glorification of death as a means of atonement conflict with the attitude that is responsible for the abolition of capital punishment in most parts of the world today. On the other, Tim’s loss of respect for his own life and happiness looks like an ascetic ideal of slave morality. When an action is fundamentally a reaction, it is characteristic of slave morality, asserts Nietzsche. [While every aristocratic morality springs from a triumphant affirmation of its own demands, the slave morality says no from the very outset and this no is its creative deed.” (Nietzsche, 19) Tim’s anguish is akin to that of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s protagonist of Crime and Punishment. Both characters glorify pain and suffering. It may be noted here that, conventionally, most intellectuals from Socrates to Dostoyevsky tended to endorse grief as ennobling and this is in sharp contrast with the Nietzsche perspective. [Pain and suffering are always inevitable for a large intelligence and a deep heart. The really great men must, I think, have great sadness on earth.” (Dostoyevsky, 179)] If the theme of Seven Pounds is about the need for morality in society, we may want to know how the society responded to the ideal of the film. Judging by the reviews, the reaction was mostly negative. The film qualified for a meagre 4.6 on Rotten Tomatoes. Nevertheless, it is to be mentioned that it was a box office success. It would be unrealistic to interpret this success as an indication of viewer’s approval of the film’s message, if any. It can be said that the film stirred the viewers’ imagination to the extent that it appealed to their sentiments. On the face of it, the word morality has a positive connotation. Morality is the foundation on which humans build their strength for superhuman acts. But it has its darker side too. It can make us compulsive and be responsible for prejudices. This aspect is dealt with, with great conviction, in the Tom Hanks starrer Philadelphia (1993) directed by Jonathan Demme. In terms of acceptance by the community, the film can be said to have done a fairly good job. HIV, AIDS, gays, homosexuality and homophobia being the central points of the plot, we could say the focus of the film is on contemporary issues; it was in fact hailed as a bold effort and the first mainstream Hollywood film to take up these problems. At the same time, the concern is about discrimination, which has existed in one form or the other since the beginning of civilization. Strictly speaking, neither of them connects readily to moral considerations. They have more to do with the ideals of democracy and human rights and that explains why agreement on a wider scale becomes possible. Few would deny the point intended to be driven home by the film and the value of the film lies in the scope it offers for retrospection and acknowledging some of our prejudices and fallacies stemming either from ignorance or from intolerance to things or practices that go against our belief system, with respect to sexual orientation for instance. The complexities of modern life present new problems with the result that the society needs to become more and more sensible in dealing with them. This is what justifies the interest of people who do not hesitate to invest in a project like Philadelphia, which is evidently risky in view of its plot that challenges the established norms and goes clearly against the majority’s perceived views on what is moral and what is not. However, the success of any such effort ultimately depends on the persuasive skill of the presentation. Even then, the sustainability of the impact of such presentations is limited because prejudices are not easy to shake off. Linda Holtzman informs us, “in 1998, the five films nominated for Best Picture were Shakespeare in Love, Elizabeth, Life Is Beautiful, Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line and none of these films featured gay, lesbian or bisexual characters or themes (311). It might appear that from Nietzsche to Demme, people have different notions of morality that are often inconsistent. We would do well to realize that the concept of morality is a dynamic one in which we seek solutions to our anticipated social and emotional problems in an ethical code. But this code cannot be uniform and it keeps modifying with the conditions of time and space. As Einstein said, “We cannot solve problems by applying the same kind of thinking that we used when we created them.” Works Cited Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. Madison: Cricket House Books LLC, 2010. Print. Holtzman, Linda. Media Messages: What Film, Television and Popular Music Teach Us About Race, Class, Gender and Sexual Orientation. New York: M. E. Sharpe Inc., 2000. Print. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Genealogy of Morals in The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche ed. Oscar Levy Volume 13. New York: Russell and Russell, 1964. Print. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Genealogy of Morals. New York: Dover Publications, 2003. Print. Passon, Jerry W. The Corvette in Literature and Culture: Symbolic Dimensions of America’s Sports Car. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, 2011. Print. Read More