Chapter 2 Why We Have To Find A New
Moral System
Part A
William Butler Yeats
“Things
fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere
anarchy is loosed upon the world.
The
blood-dimmed tide is loosed and everywhere
The
ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The
best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
(from “The Second Coming” by W.B. Yeats, 1919)
When
our idea of God began to erode so did our ideas of right and wrong, and when
those ideas began to erode, we became the society that Yeats described in his
great poem “The Second Coming”. We live in a time in which some of the most
immoral of citizens are filled with “passionate intensity”: fraud artists call
themselves "entrepreneurs”; Mafia thugs claim sincerely that they are just
soldiers in one more kind of war; warmongers tout their indispensability. In
other words, these people see themselves as moral people, heroic ones even.
Meanwhile, some of what should be society's best citizens “lack all
conviction”.
For
example, it would seem logical that people in the Science-driven countries of
the West, in looking for moral direction, should turn to their experts, the
scientists, and most especially, the ones who specialize in the study of human
societies, their values systems, and the morés they spawn: things like the
actions that people perform, the statements, oral and written, that people make
about which acts are “good”, and the rationales that they give to justify their
actions. In the West, these experts are our sociologists and cultural
anthropologists.
But social
scientists in the West have no moral direction to offer their fellow citizens.
In fact, they have given up on trying to define right and wrong. In their
writings, they question whether “values” exist in any real way at all. Ruth
Benedict, the American anthropologist, put it succinctly: "Morality differs in every
society, and is a convenient term for socially approved habits." (1.)
Some
even go over to the offence and question what it is that Science is seeking.
Are scientists seeking the "truth" about "reality" or what
exactly? The varied answers to this question are all parts of a raging
controversy in the universities of the world right now.
Thomas Kuhn
In “The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, Thomas Kuhn argued that the
whole activity called “science” is a process that is not strictly rational. It
does not move forward in a steady march of improving knowledge. In Kuhn's view,
science always moves from a less useful picture of the world to a more useful
one by unpredictable leaps, rather than in a gradual, rational expanding of
human knowledge. He called these leaps "paradigm shifts".
Paradigm
shifts occur for individuals, communities, and nations as each individual who
“gets it” has her moment of insight and then experiences a leap of
understanding that makes her see reality in a new and radically different way.
A kind of “conversion experience” that then steers her into a sect of fellow
believers. Whatever else it is, Science - says Kuhn - is not merely rational.
It is driven as much by unconscious and social factors as by conscious,
logical, "rational" ones. Not surprisingly, Kuhn’s work has provoked
many responses, pro and con. (2.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
What are your thoughts now? Comment and I will reply. I promise.