I think there is an unspoken attitude in the protestant tradition that living a moral life is essentially easy. This may sound strange, but what I mean by it is that a protestant assumes there is no skill, no learned aspect to leading a moral existence. All that is needed is that you make the choice to live morally, and then stick by that decision, mainly through strength of character or self-oppression.
This attitude leads to some unfortunate effects in north european moral life. Firstly, it fosters arrogance on the part of the morally enlightened individual. There will be a tendency to look down upon those who live less morally conscious life, as all that would be needed to turn this practise around would be the choice to do so. Sometimes this could also lead to erroneous moral prerogatives as one would be inclined to think that ones life is eminently moral and can get no better.
Another consequence of this way of thinking is that it may result in the fear and thus loathing of morally superiour ways of life. In stead of admiring those that are capable following a better moral path, one hates him or her to guard off ones own guilty conscience. Since most people like to view themselves as moral individuals, any morality that does not concur with the way they are living must be seen as wrong, or their own life would be wrong.
This could be a way of explaining why many people in this part of the world despises vegetarians for example. There is no room for thinking that what you do yourself is wrong without it incurring guilt. The perspective of moral skill makes this way of thinking possible. Living a morally perfect life takes large amounts of positive energy, not just self-restraint. It demands that you set aside part of your life for this purpose. Morals, thinking about them and working with your personality to approach them, must be prioritized alongside such things as your job for example. This is how Jesus and Buddha became great, they devoted their entire life to morality and thought.
In other words; when you live your life in a way that is wrong according to what you see as morally good, it means that you are unable to, in this point in time, live morally better. You should still aspire to get better, thinking that shifting to a morally conscious way of life is like turning a switch is dangerous, not only in the ways described above, but also to yourself. It may lead to depression or even madness or suicide.
One can and should allways strive to get better, but this should be done in a constructive and positive manner, much like practising on an instrument for example, not through self-punishment and self-hate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To live morally in the protestant sense is a matter of living by principles I think. Rules are difficult to follow. Because reality is complex perhaps? And there are more rules than the ten commandments for a good protestant. The more you think about how to be moral the more rules there are to follow...
ReplyDeleteSo I try to forget the rules and go for insight. You can't do what you really understand is wrong, can you?
Take for instance killing. When you think about it the precept against killing is more universal than that. It is about non-violence. Not to harm living beings, or rather it is really about being bringing to life, planting, caring, nurturing. There is a yes behind the no, which perhaps makes being moral easier. When you do the opposite of what is proscribed you don't think about morality. If you don't think: I should be planting trees now really shouldn't I?
When I talk about protestant morals, I am also referring to the western philosophical tradition which is heavily influenced by, or indeed based upon protestant christianity. This philosophy is much deeper than the mere postulation of rules that you are referring to, but I think it is mostly saturated with the way of thinking that I describe in my post.
ReplyDeleteYou can, and indeed you must do things that you understand is wrong, because the perfect moral life is close to impossible. Even in your example, which I agree is a good way of thinking, you say: "I should be planting trees". Well, are you planting trees?
ReplyDeleteIn some ways, the most moral society is the hunter-gatherer society that never takes more than it needs, and always give something back as compensation for what it takes. I think you agree with this. My point still stands, that you can not simply choose to live this way at this moment instantly just because you realize that this is the best way. It can however, be a goal, but it does need a lot of work and determination to get there. If it is not that important to you, you don't do it, and then you have to understand that you don't live this way because indeed you were unable to, not because you are in essence a bad person.
Yes I agree but it is through living by rules that it is possible for the morally enlightened individual to look down upon people less moral. If you are comparing then you must have a standard and that implies rules. Anyway I feel that that kind of morality is probably forced rather than understood. I think you are right when you say that you can't live the perfect moral life. But that is only if you compare. You can be perfectly healthy and sound but still do "immoral" things. The immorality comes into the picture when you start comparing.
ReplyDeleteI think that you need some effort in the beginning but then that effort must be dropped. That is why moral people may say that being moral is easy. Why, the most difficult thing must be not living morally! That creates far more problems for us that living morally would do...