MORAL RELATIVISM/DECADENCE IN OUR SOCIETY TODAY

Preamble

Man is a moral being, unique in creation and possessing higher powers. His actions are controlled by thoughts and emotions, desires and intention. Mans actions can be judged good or bad, praiseworthy or blameworthy, right or wrong. In the light of these, man is termed a “moral being.” Man is not just an animal, he is a person who can choose what he will do to an extent and who in some cases is responsible for his actions. By the virtue of being a moral being, man should not live without morality. Social problems provoke more philosophical reflection and debate than personal dilemmas because of their far reaching consequences. When many people are affected by a practice, many points of view will be voiced and resulting disputes calls for rational deliberations. The rules of conduct we have been following in our daily lives without conscious deliberation seems now to be modified or even replaced with moral relativism and such debate between moral relativism and objectivism accounts for a significant portion of philosophical reflection in ethics, and this is what this paper seems to do.

Moral Relativism and the Present Day Society

Moral relativism is the belief that there is no single true morality. There are varieties of possible moralities or moral frames or moral frames of reference and whether something is morally right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust is a relative matter: relative to one or another morality or moral frame of reference.

However, throughout history, peoples view concerning moral questions has objectively correct answers. There are obvious truths just as there are obvious facts about the world. The idea of relativism comes through the sophist in the Ancient Greece era but Plato attempted to refute it. But the concept of moral relativism surfaced again during the time of Nietzsche as to proffer solution to the dead and waning traditional principles. Nietzsche created the übermensch, which means the superman or the over man. The übermensch is the higher man who creates his own values and establishes his own moral principles. As a means of proffering solution to the “death of God”, he posited the übermensch who is the superman; a man who creates his own values, who distinguishes for himself the rightness and wrong of his actions. The waning or fading traditional morality (Christian morality) according to Nietzsche denies life from flourishing.

Doing away with objective moral facts could bring man back to the state of the nature, where man determines and does anything that he likes. There is a society to ensure social order and harmony. The society is ordered and governed by its laws. It is also a truism that societies lives by norms of morality. There will be no society without law and morality. This was pointed out by David Hume when he says the “human nature cannot by any means subsist without the association of individual; and that association never could have take place, were no regard paid to laws of equity and justice.” It is a fact that law and morality exist in the society to ensure peace and harmony by regulating human conduct and interactions. In the world of rapid change and continuous conflict, many long-established principles of actions and standards of evaluations of actions are crumbling. In the European cultures, we see cases of legalizing such immoral acts gay marriage, abortion and so on. The relative nature of morality in our society today has led to the decadence of morality. 

At first glance, moral relativism may appear ideal in allowing individual freedom, but from a more critical look, one could see that resorting to moral Relativism can lead to socio-political problem in the society, hence bringing chaos and disorder in the society. Nietzsche’s concept of the übermensch as a solution to the decaying morality of his time might have solved the problem of moral decadence during that period. But as stands now, we need an objective standard of morality that will stand firm to avoid disorders and chaos in the society. Applying the concept of relativism and the superman which Nietzsche advocated for in our contemporary society today, will make things to fall apart, if it has not fallen already. 

Moral decadence has dealt a deadly blow on the ethical psyche of the nation. At the individual level, it has created lack of integrity in many. It has blurred the vision of the young and old so much that it has become difficult to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong. In our country, there are many learned men but only few are educated. Being educated involves a sound knowledge both in character and in learning. If people are denied of books that could help in moulding them morally, the society suffers from academic malnutrition, starvation, moral atrophy and depravity. Such a society will produce morally depraved leaders without conscience and the society suffers at large. Moral books should be encouraged. Individuals should also curtail the way they visit the internet world. Some immoral acts originate from the internet. In our African settings, we have values and codes of conduct. Mimicking the western culture and mentality sometimes won’t lead us to good. We should embrace the good qualities they have and leave them with their immoral acts which are bound in our country. 

However, there are three facts that make a human act morally good or morally evil namely: the object, the circumstance, and the purpose of the agents. These factors are called “moral determinants.” If all these determinants are morally good, the act itself is morally good, but if these determinants are morally evil, the act itself is morally evil. But how do we know when these moral determinants are good or evil? There is no mark on any of them to show they are good or evil and this question led to the issue of norm and criterion of morality. According to Bittle, “ethics demands a norm of morality namely, an objective standard or rule or principle which determines the morality of an act in itself.” If a particular act conforms to the norm, it is morally good “in itself”; but if it deviates from this norm, it is morally evil “in itself.” such a norm, therefore is objective in the sense that it refers to the object of the act, and determines whether a particular act is in itself morally good or evil, irrespective of, and prior to any judgement of man regarding its morality. Our judgement follows the comparison of the act with its standard or norm. If we find out that the act conforms to the norm of morality, we judge the act to be good; but if we find that the act deviates from the norm, we judge it to be evil. To be effective as a criterion or standard of judging for us in many practical problems of life, the norm of morality must have definite qualifications which include:

Unchangeablity

Universality

Accessibility

Applicability

Single standard

All these points must be put into considerations in our daily actions, to ensure that our actions are morally justified.

Conclusion

At the corporate level, moral relativism has legitimized corrupt practices to an extent that the morally upright will feel ashamed of being so morally conscious. There is a dire need to re-orientate the entire populace. Parents as well as their children all need to have a new focus. Religious groups too have the social responsibility to reinstate faith in the divine. Religious clerics must through personal conduct rebuild confidence in moral uprightness. The school system must not only inculcate discipline in the students and teachers through verbal counselling, morality must be built into the curriculum for maximum impact.  Morality should by its nature acts as an agent of social control. Morality is superior to law and makes law redundant. Where there is a high standard of morality, there is a little or no need for law. Since man is not perfectly rational, because to be rational is to be moral and to be perfectly rational is to be perfectly moral, man finds it difficult to live a moral life. He has irrational elements in his being which generates irrational tendencies that militate against the moral way of life. It is precisely to curtail theses irrational tendencies that law exist. Law therefore is a remedy for man’s moral deficiency. Its presence is only needed when morality is absent, and the degree of its presence is determined by the degree in which morality is absent. Therefore, all hands must be on desk to bring back our moral values. The problem is not limited to the secular aspect of our society, even religious institutions, schools and almost all sectors of life are experiencing in one way or the order the effect of this decadence. To ensure orderliness in the society, objective standard of morality should rise above the relativistic and nihilist view of morality, for there to be order and discipline in the society. If everyone goes back to the true nature of our morality which is objectivism, the society and the world at large will be a better place to stay. If every individual are morally sound, I don’t think there will be need for laws, and that is the reason why law is considered as an ethical minimum. Law comes in due to lack of morality.

Stanley N.

16-06-2016