In Other Words

Ethics: The Appeal of Absolutes

This entry continues on from a course of thought that I started a few weeks ago (the latest entry can be found here). If this entry does not make sense, it might be a good idea to look there for explanations. Don’t be afraid to comment, however.

Absolutes are a part of our lives. They help us form our judgements, decide who to put in jail and let us decide what course of action is best for all of us, from the lowest to the highest. Absolutes are an accepted part of most people’s lives. Often accepted without question. Learned from authority figures, like parents, teachers, politicians and priests.

Some areas influenced by absolutes are law (good and evil), relationships (love), politics (the unalienable rights of man) and religion (God, heaven, hell).

Yet what do absolutes mean for us? Why, if Darwinian Ethics holds true, do we have them? Darwinian Ethics suggests that there are no real absolutes, that ethical models exist because they make life better for the species as a whole. If Darwinian Ethics holds true then absolutes exist only in our own minds and are only as real as any concept can be.

Absolutes exist because they make our lives easier. Even if they don’t actually exist in any physical sense absolutes make life more bearable. A group of people that already has to spend most of its energy battling its environment does not have the energy to spare to doubt. Doubt, though important, uses a huge amount of energy. It makes us uncertain of what action to take and any time spent on indecision is time not spent on increasing our chances for survival. People simply didn’t have time for uncertainty.

A group of people that has absolutes can make quick judgement calls, even while groups that embrace relativity can’t make those same calls The first group might be wrong more often, but that is more than overbalanced by their ability to act quickly and more aggressively (absolutes are necessary fanaticisms, it’s very hard to be fanatic about relativism, unless, of course, you consider relativism as an absolute.)

Then there is the argument of homogeneity. For most of the existence of man homogeneity was highly desirable. Homogeneity creates unity and unity allows us to overcome our enemies (during wartime we see countries coming together to fight a common enemy. Extolling virtues such as nationalism, absolute trust and love for one’s fellows.) It is far easier to fall in line with a set of absolute truths than relativistic mumbling.

Our young wouldn’t be able to understand why they should fall in line with a number of relativistic ethical concepts when everybody around us admits that they are no more right than any other set of beliefs. It is simply in our nature to try look for absolutes (I myself often fall prey to the desire for absolute truth).

So, in other words, Absolutes made our life better. That, of course, begs the question, ‘why, then, try and debunk them?’ as I seem to be trying to do in these articles. The reason for that is two fold. First off there is my need to find the truth (which has pushed our technological advancement, which, as far as I can see has made our lives a great deal better. Yes, that is a slippery slope, but I can live with that.) Secondly there is the problems that I see arising from the absolutes that we adhere to.

First off all there is a big difference between us now and several centuries ago. We now have a great deal of energy left over from our industrialisation and technological advancement which we can (and often do) invest indecisiveness (such as science). These have led to some amazing discoveries, which in turn have given us even more energy to ‘waste’.

Secondly, and far more importantly right now, absolutes generate conflict. Most religious conflict, for instance, has sprung forth from disagreement about absolutes, (i.e. God). A great deal of fighting used to occur mainly because we were striving for resources. Now, however, we strive more and more often about ideology (largely because we often believe we already have enough resources.) Ideological conflict, I believe, are all about absolutes rubbing each other the wrong way.

My perception of GOOD and EVIL is better than your perception of GOOD and EVIL (with better, of course, being another word linked to absolutes).

Absolutes worked very well for us before, but now that we have physical changed the world and ourselves (or, at least how we behave and how we spend our time) we have to change our mindset as well. To quote Albert Einstein:

"The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them."

posted by Symbol @ 27.11.05