Because the assumption of modernity is that human existence is bounded by conception and death - outwith there is nothing of our-selves - therefore the morality is one based upon living human experience.
The relevant aspect of human experience adopted by modern morality (perhaps inevitably) relates to pleasure-pain - in motivational terms this is hedonic (pleasure seeking) or therapeutic (suffering avoiding).
This roughly corresponds to what people term as Right and Left of the political spectrum - those on the Right are broadly orientated to maximizing positive and pleasurable experiences while those on the Left have a more therapeutic stance - in that their ultimate justification is the relief of negative experiences, alleviation of suffering.
And this is why the Left sees itself as a higher morality than the Right - in that therapeutic alleviation of suffering is seen as more sophisticated, altruistic, compassionate etc - than trying to create as much positive emotionality as possible.
The Right sees our finite life as something we should make the most of (for ourselves and - some- others; the Left as something we should get through with the least misery (for ourselves perhaps, but mainly justified in terms of therapy for others).
All this is bizarre and incoherent and unfounded as a basis for "morality" - but that is what we've actually got.
4 comments:
Two sides. Same coin.
It strikes me that the Right seems largely unconcious of its hedonic motivations as it rails against the Left's therapeutic morals. Or, that it tends to drape such hedonic morals in heroic cultural aims, economic common sense, or tradition.
Shifting to organized Christianity, I sense that it has tended more toward the therapeutic side of things, much to the chagrin of traditionally-minded Christians (who want to get back to some church-centered form of society in the hope that it will solve "modernity").
Along those lines, this post reminded me of an article NT Wright published back during the birdemic in which he argued that Jesus and resurrection had nothing to do with going to heaven but was really about helping people avoid pain here and now by working in soup kitchens, solving unemployment, and turning churches in pecking centers and so forth. It was quite the read! It's not available online anymore, but I have preserved some excerpts over at my place.
@Frank. Yes indeed. Middle para is a good insight!
NT Wright is a kind of ultimate "clever silly" in recent (protestant) Christian discourse.
He is apparently the most intelligent and learned of New Testament scholars of this era, by current academic criteria - and at the same time a crass, self-blinded, gullible simpleton.
The first is spiritually irrelevant - except in establishing pseudo-credentials for the strategic harm he does consequent upon the second.
So people should not seek to avoid pain/gain pleasure? Basically all that we do is motivated by this, I read your blog because I like philosophy and thoughtful read makes me feel good
@Ap That would be just nihilism, a mental sickness - and the official mainstream ideology. Clearly such beliefs help the demonic agenda of inducing existential despair. The big question is why so many of us, including me for decades, choose to cling tenaciously to such self destructive assumptions.
Post a Comment