Universal Morality is Bogus
The first thing that struck me about the first reading from 1984 was the way in which people were brainwashed into thinking the unthinkable: that war was somehow peace, freedom is slavery, and that ignorance is strength. It reminded me of how I used to think that everyone had more or less the same morals as me. Boy was I wrong!
Within Criminology, there is a term to describe crimes that are seen as “universally condemned”, these are called “mala in se”. “Mala in se” crimes include murder, assault, rape and theft. On the other hand, however, there are “mala prohibita” crimes. These are seen as crimes that are bad because they are “bound by the culture they are in”. For example, traffic violations and jaywalking would be considered “mala prohibita” crimes.
Criminology then asks the question, are “mala in se” crimes actually universally condemnable acts? Or is every crime a “mala prohibita”, and there is no universal morality? For instance, war is murder, and many people are totally okay with war- even deeming it necessary. What about rape? For the longest time, rape didn’t even exist within marriage. Enslaved peoples were assaulted, and stolen from without a second glance.
So how does all of this relate to this first reading? Well, it reminded me of how malleable morality is. To us, obviously, slavery doesn’t equal freedom… but slave owners in the 1800s might argue differently. One of the ways they justified their disgusting mistreatment of other human beings was by claiming that enslaved peoples were inherently lesser of a person- subhuman. And that they needed to be taken care of because of this. (This is called paternalism.) So in a messed up way, morally slave owners felt like the only way that enslaved peoples could live better lives (arguably a "freer" one- I know I know this is horrible), was if they were enslaved. Which again, to us, is insane.
So when I see these crazy slogans in 1984, I am reminded that not long ago our president was saying that there were “good people on both sides” at a white supremacist riot that lead to the death of a progressive protestor. I am reminded of how he made fun of disabled people on stage and threatened the life of a Michigan politician.
These are acts that I thought would be universally morally egregious- but they aren’t. Morality is an odd thing and a very subjective one at that.
[Question for everyone: What are times that you saw your morals questioned, and how did you react?]
During this entire pandemic I feel like the word "morality" has almost lost its meaning. So many political decisions, public reactions, and other interactions all seemed to be "morally wrong" in our most basic sense of morality. Obviously this was very startling, frustrating, and sad to see but it showed how false the idea of a common moral set may be. Especially within people who pride themselves on having great morals, it seems they don't always match up with what I would deem as morally good, or someone else would. Morality truly is odd and it is continually changing.
ReplyDeleteReally well written post! I really relate to what you describe when you said you felt appalled by the beliefs of the citizens in 1984, and how their morals and outlook on the world felt completely brainwashed. Whenever I read a dystopian novel it just reminds me how prone the human mind (especially a child's mind) is to influence, as all someone knows to be right or wrong, left or right, is what they are taught. Personally whenever my morals are questioned I don't speak out, as with many other issues. I prefer to keep my thoughts to myself, unless it is a topic that is of particular importance in which case I think it is important to educate/notify others on my viewpoints as well.
ReplyDeleteYES. This is one of the most striking things about this book to me as well. People really can be convinced that deeply harmful actions are justified -- and even "good."
ReplyDeleteI think this is certainly valid as morality is inherently a social construct and based on the society its in it can have different meanings.
ReplyDeleteYeah for sure. It's obvious to us that the actions the government takes in 1984 to control people's lives are immoral - but that's just because we're comparing it to what people find immoral in our society. To people who have lived within that society for the whole life, the methods the government employs wouldn't seem particularly immoral, just part of everyday life. This is especially true for the children that were born there - which is why we see them so entrenched in the society's values, even turning their own parents into the government.
ReplyDeleteThis was really interesting. I feel like the range of different morals are showcased a lot in politics. Some people believed that Trump was a good leader for this country which is an opinion that I never understood but I think it's the perfect example of how different people's morals can be. I don't think anyone ever truly has the exact same moral principles as anyone else. I think that morals are shaped by a lot of individual experiences so while people can have very similar morals that might overlap a lot there will always be some differences.
ReplyDeleteYou make a lot of good points. I think this is a really interesting topic especially since in the world of 1984 if your morality goes against what the government wants then you are in the wrong which really shows how the society decides what is moral.
ReplyDeleteMore so than morality being malleable I think it depends on your point of view on the world. Right and wrong change at least ever so slightly person to person so of course everybody's sense of morality is slightly different. We have many radical people in our world right now but why are they called radical? Their view on the world is too different from ours and while we value things such as equality they were raised differently, to value themselves above others except for the ones who were placed above them, such as (most likely) their father and someone like our previous president.
ReplyDeletePeople are so unlikely to change their core beliefs because those core beliefs and that person's experiences is who they are. If one of these core beliefs is that the ends justify the means, then even something like murder becomes justifiable as long as it satisfies another core belief.
Since a person's core values are hard to change then morality too is hard to change. Really the illusion of malleability is caused by the variance person by person, group by group.
This is really interesting, and a great point. I think it's interesting to think about where our morals come from, and justify or condemn different actions based on these morals. I think a lot of our morals come directly from the people around us. Our parents might have the biggest impact, but our society also plays a big role in teaching us what are socially acceptable and therefore "moral" behaviors. If our individual morals come directly from the society we live in, how can there be universal morals if we all live in different societies? It definitely feels like we should have universal morals, but I agree that things like this book and slavery make it clear that we don't.
ReplyDeleteI think the plasticity of morality goes to show how malleable the human mind is. We are so easily (too easily!) manipulated, often by ourselves, to see things in a way that fits our previously formed moral structures, or to make exceptions to our structures of morality to fit something we experience. Oftentimes, our moral values are close to arbitrary, and it's hard to determine what the course of action is when you discover a value you have to be like that.
ReplyDeleteFor example, what the heck is our social norm that above all other parts of the body, a few must be covered by clothing? The space between our legs is one, but more weirdly, only females must cover their chest. When I realized how silly this value was I decided it was unfair for females to have to cover their chest 'cause they got some lumps. They're just lumps.