16
A Universal Set of Ethical Standards? (piefed.zip)
submitted 3 days ago by to c/philosophy@lemmy.world
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I awoke this morning with a question mulling in my thoughts of why there isn't a universal set of ethical standards for all. It seemed like a simple concept, but as I came to my senses I realized the error. The reality that this isn't a new problem, it may be THE problem society has struggled with since the dawn of consciousness.

What I took away from the thought experiment I conducted between waking up and getting around is that from Hammurabi's code through the advent of the major religions to the Magna Carta and the U.S. Constitution, we keep building on the answers to this question and refining the processes of acceptance and fairness. But even though global societal rules are more consistent than they may have been in the past, these ideals still drive conflict that individuals are willing to die to maintain.

What I also took away is that I live under a substantial rule set. Some unwritten, some written. Some I am aware of, but some I can only trust are reasonable by my standard set. I spend a substantial part of my day navigating right and wrong, from the morning commute to interactions at work, home, and points in between.

The last takeaway was about an individual whose personal standards become separate from the standards of the society/community in which they live. This one I didn't resolve, other than that it's the test of individual courage. Why it's not simple is that an individual with the courage to challenge is an anomaly and will face societal friction. Only time will show if the societal system backs their ideas or rejects them. Examples that came to mind were Paul Revere and Joan of Arc, whom society "revered" over time, and Robert Owen who initiated the New Harmony experiment in Indiana, an idea that didn't survive the test of time.

Why isn't there a universal set of ethical standards? Because there isn't universal Providence, this was my conclusion.

Ultimately I decided to quit thinking about it and just watch football. The oblong kind and probably a good word to illustrate why there will never be universal consensus --> ๐Ÿˆ

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 1 point 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

A set of standards has existed. The golden rule is not without assumption and cultural bias. I think that Dennis E Taylor points out the flaw in your assertion well in the novel Heaven's River. In it, an alien race has the golden rule as a cultural touchstone, and a rule in their culture that states what you said. However, the alien points out that what you have described is actually not the golden rule, but the silver rule, saying:

There are three rules of behavior...

  • The Iron Rule: Treat others less powerful than yourself however you like.
  • The Silver Rule: Treat others as you'd like to be treated.
  • The Golden Rule: Treat others as they'd like to be treated.

The cultural assumption we make of the golden rule as you put it is that the burdens of interaction and the interpretation thereof lie squarely on our interlocutors, rather than on ourselves. Under the Silver rule, if you would not, yourself, be bothered by someone playing their music out of a speaker on public transit then, by treating others as you'd wish to be treated, you can play music loudly on public transit without doing anything wrong. There is nothing wrong with an utter lack of consideration of others under the Silver Rule. Taylor uses the example of a Carnist offering a Vegan a steak when they are hungry. The vegan would refuse, and likely be offended, while the Carnist would have done nothing morally objectionable under the Silver rule.

There is no set of rules which is perfect and unassailable, because everything we do has cultural context. This other, alien version of the "Golden Rule" comes from the assumption that, as moral creatures, it is our moral duty to communicate and determine the preferences of those around us before taking any action which could affect them. I'm sure that someone with a different cultural context could make the case that there is a flawed assumption in the alien's Golden Rule, as well. (In the book, Taylor points out that this other golden rule implicitly privileges ridiculous beliefs and preferences, potentially leading to unreasonable outcomes)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent