Important Questions.
Have you ever wondered, like me as a little boy, why things are as they are? Why am I here? I don't mean the biological process, but moreover is there a deeper reason that has intention? As the years pass by, I come to the conclusion that although those questions are interesting, how important would it be if there was an authority that knew the answer to everything? One individual resource that had all the answers, including all those big philosophical dilemmas and scientific queries, such as how matter can be created and destroyed. The next point that has been significant for my own internal thinking, is how I live my life, does not rely on having absolute correct knowledge of everything.
I occasionally pose the question, what if a supposed superior, knowing authority does not reveal a comprehensive set of answers to all questions, but claims authority to dictate social behaviour. The rules would be objective but if structured, not possible to be changed. That would mean if the results are unjust, unfair consequences could occur.
In everyday life, certain situations and examples might force moral actions to be taken. In hindsight, sometimes they may not have been the best decisions but each time there is an opportunity to learn and improve a moral compass. Having an open mind gives a better choice of possible action, with the intention for a better consequence.
So my understanding of good morality is that it is not always fixed and depends on the outcome, in any particular situation. With this in mind, so many societies and individuals resolutely pursue their belief of what morality is, by referring to an objective set of edicts and not applying any personal judgement or reasoning.
One last point that I think evokes an important question, should an authority that claims definitive knowledge but does not reveal any explanation as for why, be entitled to dictate social behaviour. If it does, then what about freedom of choice? Bearing in mind, limits of social equality, where does one find that happy balance of collective social justice and individual sense of conscience?
I occasionally pose the question, what if a supposed superior, knowing authority does not reveal a comprehensive set of answers to all questions, but claims authority to dictate social behaviour. The rules would be objective but if structured, not possible to be changed. That would mean if the results are unjust, unfair consequences could occur.
In everyday life, certain situations and examples might force moral actions to be taken. In hindsight, sometimes they may not have been the best decisions but each time there is an opportunity to learn and improve a moral compass. Having an open mind gives a better choice of possible action, with the intention for a better consequence.
So my understanding of good morality is that it is not always fixed and depends on the outcome, in any particular situation. With this in mind, so many societies and individuals resolutely pursue their belief of what morality is, by referring to an objective set of edicts and not applying any personal judgement or reasoning.
One last point that I think evokes an important question, should an authority that claims definitive knowledge but does not reveal any explanation as for why, be entitled to dictate social behaviour. If it does, then what about freedom of choice? Bearing in mind, limits of social equality, where does one find that happy balance of collective social justice and individual sense of conscience?
No comments have been added yet.
