By that, I mean the people who are not sceptical nor scientifically literate, but are also not especially religious. I know how the religious fraction of PWANMs rationalise it - they have their books, so there's no room for musing there.
Of course, their actions are informed by their consciences. But a conscience is just an evolved mechanism to promote social cohesion, promoted through kin selection. Don't misunderstand, there's nothing wrong with obeying your conscience (it does get it right most of the time - ain't that a coincidence), but to do so blindly conveys a certain...unresponsibility, at least in my eyes.
To blindly obey one's evolutionary programming, rather than self-analyse and evaluate, seems a characteristic in common with an automaton.
Perhaps I'm not in a position to judge, considering how I am unsure exactly what I think about ethics. I bought into Sam Harris' ideas for a while, but then I noticed he was just dodging a deeper question (yes, Sam, I agree that the optimum path to maximum wellbeing can be found using science, but why is wellbeing our metric for 'goodness' in the first place?). I should have twigged earlier that it couldn't be as easy as that.
Perhaps it isn't the fact that others don't have answers that I'm bothered by, perhaps it's that they don't even ask the questions. In fact, I'm certain of it.
In any case, I feel quite strongly that an awareness of ethics that goes deeper than 'I do what my conscience says', can help one become a better person. For instance, I've noticed that I'm more polite to others than the average person. I smile a lot. I donate a little more to charity than my peers (It still isn't much - I am a student after all). I think before I say things, especially if my words might have consequences. I simply cannot leave a conversation if I think I've upset the other person. I try to keep the knowledge that everyone I talk to has a history, desires, principles and emotions at the forefront of my mind.
This is an extremely unscientific anecdote. I'm open to being proved wrong. Until then, a conviction that simply asking the questions about ethics can make one a better person seems appropriate.
I also don't mean to self-promote. I know full well I'm far from perfect, and I have flaws aplenty, just as we all do.
*I use this word deliberately. 'Ethics' conveys a more honest, rational approach, rather than the authoritarian, monolithic connotations of 'morals'. I am told that morals are universal principles (eg. ten commandments), whilst ethics are heuristics for individual situations. By these definitions, I'm not sure morals even exist, but ethics seem like useful things to have.
**PWANM - people who are not me
No comments:
Post a Comment