Monday, November 17, 2008

Ethics Authorities & Choices

I guess I watch too much news….
When I start thinking…

Isn’t it time for a Hetero-Dignity celebration, parade, and civic holiday? When the streets are blocked from traffic and hetero couples (and their offspring) march in masses through city streets fully and modestly dressed, only in blue and pink (blue for boys, pink for girls). And signs that say ‘Down with social laws intrinsically linked to the philosophy of demand, without compunction, based solely on physical ‘wants’. Life and love and family partnerships are not steered by those things!”

And then after that, I start wondering why more protest is given to the above themes of personal and physical want than is given to lost and abused children, or young men dying in a needless war.

And then I start thinking, maybe our failed economics could recover if we did an about-face. My strategy being that we need another set of auditors.

Who are we kidding when we so arrogantly say to ourselves. “All is good. All is well. They’ll not get away with that theft and corruption,” we say. The auditors will catch that underhanded business.” But so often they don’t.

And the reason they don’t is because so many Auditors check only the math. And they don’t worry, as long as all the sums fall in line. So for years, pilfering goes down without the slightest suspicions.

So then I start thinking, if businesses are going to operate with absolute integrity and stay above the water line, what is needed besides a Calculus auditor is an Ethical auditor.

And then I start thinking….Ethics is good…reads nice, sounds nice, parses nice. But at the same time, it is way too weirdly defined. It is a rather slimy thing, dependent on the various authorities that are allowed to pattern it.

Authority number one is Divine authority (i.e. spiritual, religious). This authority demands obedience to divine/religious codes of conduct.

Number two, is Nature authority, and within this value system, human nature and the desires of the flesh sculpt the demands.

And finally, at the bottom of the list is the Authority of Reason. This authority propagates patterns of behavior that fall within the context of rational common sense.

It’s a choice, so what am I so dis-enchanted about? Everyone gets to pick their own ethics and their own authority. And everyone gets to slice it how they want it. This is a democracy, is it not?


Perhaps what all countries need to do is vote for a preferred Ethics Authority, rather than twittering around with specific plebiscite proposals (i.e. same sex unions) being added to voting ballots. Because once the authority is chosen and understood, governments will no longer have to spend all that time, energy, and money on circular debates, that approve one proposal this year, and dish it the next.

With a duly elected Ethics Authority in place, full dedication could be given to a complete spectrum of social issues without parades, protests, and uprisings.

It’s none of my business but still I can’t help asking…
Which Authority would you vote for?
Which Authority do you think would win?


brad4d said...

Authority is overrated.

Doesn't the story have to support the author?
Nature seems to be the stage offered to present our awareness.
The foundation of relativity is by natures authority and we must constantly start over to maintain it's healthy influence.

The authority of reason gives humans the choice to ignore nature. Reason defends how we respond to the awesome power of natural influences.

When things seem beyond reason, in order to ignore it, we turn to Divine Authority, to create conceptual respect for our thinking presentations.

What I tried to present was the reversal of the "Trickle Down Theory."
Thank you for the inspiration with the question.

Roberta S said...

That would be my good friend, brad4d, lighting up the dark corners of what I failed to see while exploring a new topic.

So I pondered what he said and decided the authorities I mentioned cannot be put in a particular order. Obviously there are disastrous risks to the planet if we ignore the Nature Authority, and risks as well, if we ignore the Divinity Authority (good conscience). And still even more risks if we ignore fact and reason.

On the other hand, because nature is perceived in so many different ways. i.e. – as nothing more than a endless resource for sustenance of present life, or as nothing more than inclement weather, or irritating insects, or in the reverse, as an awesome miracle representation of the beauty and wonder of all living creatures – I hesitate to position it as the ‘foundation-authority’ for ethical thought.

I think I prefer the idea of an equal 3-way mix. I do recognize that brad4d insisted that the Nature Authority must have a ‘healthy influence’ and if I could count on that, it makes an awesome starting point. But there lies the difficulty.

As to brad4d’s question about ‘the story supporting the author’. Nah, the story doesn’t have to support the author (at least not in my writing), but the lifestyle of anyone will be and cannot be any other than that supported by their own particular choice of Authority(s).

joared said...

Ah, you concluded what I was going to say would be my preference, that all these Authorities you name are inter-related and I prefer to benefit from their synergy. Perhaps one serves as a check on the other on occasion.

On the other hand, I wonder if we could all ever agree on the list encompassed under any of these Authorities? Is it that lack of agreement that has resulted in some deciding to shed the blood of those who do not agree with them?

Roberta S said...

hi joared, thanks for commenting. And you are right. An imbalance, a fixation on only one authority, certainly does contribute to harmful situations.

brad4d said...

. a story is connected to the author and if it is supportive is a choice but observations can be balanced in the way you equalized the contributing issues to share (e)value(ation). Ethics seem to be the way we judge others that gives away what we can't conceive, so to observe (neutrally) that others can just judge themselves (in relation to supportive or critical) ~is the gift of your humor (to choose inclusion values)

Roberta S said...

Thank you, brad4d, for pointing that out. I do try to take life, my values, my philosophies, more lightly than most.

brad4d said...

"Angels have wing because they take themselves lightly" G.K.Chesterton

Roberta S said...

'Tis a nice thought, brad4d, but no angels here -- none on the ground, and none overhead.