In search of the elusive inner Moral Compass.

Introduction

Continuing the idea of a moral compass as an innate characteristic of the infant, as opposed to empiricism which argues it subsequent experiences conveyed through the senses I aim to explore this idea in this paper. The question of morals themselves is therefore of interest as to their origin and expression in their ethical outcomes. Although ethics and morals can be lumped together for the purpose of this paper I define morals as to the heading given for ethical outcomes and ethics therefore as practical outcomes.

 

Where do Morals come from?

Possibly morality first arose from the ability to view the ‘self’ separate to oneself as in self-consciousness around 150,000 years ago.

Therein early tribespeople began to attribute notions of morality in relation to what was considered right for the use of the land and in ensuring the existence of the tribe.

How this was conveyed in the evolutionary journey was brought about by psychological patterns into conscious play to associate values with feelings.  From there we see evidence of tribal law and the emergence of religion acknowledging Creator spirit(s).  

However such a narrative is rather vague and you can’t really say definitively where they came from, except to the extent a picture can emerge that ingredients in tribal law for instance facilitated social cohesion, which was paramount to survival in the long migratory journeys.

 

We see ample evidence in the First nation’s people throughout the world whose survival was dependent on a continued affinity with nature. This naturally became their spiritual roots. Hence it is virtually impossible to trace their origins specifically other than the generalized assumptions one can make of how they arose as in adoption within hostile environments.

Ethics inherent in Homers polytheism   

Homer’s phenomenology of the body incorporates the idea that our various moods keep us continually in tune with ourselves and give rise to a meaningful life; a reflection of, or as arising from the various GODs, so that there is sacred nature to our existence.  Another way of putting it would be to say our consciousness depends upon personalities at a higher level than our own, emanating from the GODS. 

The way they viewed their existence was to see their Gods as an image of humanity possessing human foibles except they were immensely powerful and eternal.

You may recall Nietzsche thought Homer's ideas are closer to our natural mode of existence than the autonomy and self-determination of the enlightenment.  

Aeschylus and divine justice

Athens was the first known democracy at the time when Aeschylus grew up about 500BC. Athenian democracy was recovering from its prior tyrannical ruler and coming to grips with a more meaningful existence. Against that backdrop of deliverance his plays covered the whole spectrum of human interactions. The plots involved the hand of fate and the consequential effect on communities in relation to the new GODs.     

Zeus, as the chief GOD maintained order, with lesser GODs believed to despise man’s greatness; so the idea took root of a sense of impiety, a false pride which consumed individuals in what we might think of today as hubris. The unjust were not always punished in their lifetime so that legacy became part of heredity, guilt and vengeance. There was a strong correlation to the idea of acting unethically brought with it retribution of one kind or another.   

The plays also talk about reconciliation and divine justice administered in the Athenian courts of justice, with help from the GODS.  

Chinese Ethics

Concurrently in China Confucius (552-479BC), and others were making a mark on society that continues to this day.  
In ancient China no separation existed between church and state. Confucius happily existed alongside the prophetic streams from Abraham and Buddha.  China was influenced from outside cultures by virtue of the ancient Silk Road 130 -1453 BC) linking east and west. The introduction of Buddhism from India in 150 BC initially met with stiff opposition so was reconciled Daoist’s traditions. Both Pure Land Buddhism and Chan (Zen) Buddhism are the two prominent strains today.

But ultimately the predominant force for ethical behavior is Confucianism due to its relevance and attraction as it relates to everyday life. For instance it is concerned with how one is to live a meaningful life: determining the optimum balance between families versus strangers. Its ethics don’t extend into the moral dilemmas talked about in the west. Rather, it is concerned with what is the right way and requires imagination according to its defining principles. However, like the west, the evolution of ideas has parallels in terms of its ethical attributes of love, loyalty. Justice, piety and affection.      

In modern day terms Confucian ethics and liberal democratic values found their way into discussions in the late 19^th and 20^th century.  But Mau brought an abrupt halt to this movement and a suppression of the ancient religious practices and belief as China became an atheist state. But post the Cultural Revolution it has thankfully moved away from these extremes and terror to work towards a more democratic society, which sits paradoxically uneasily within the confines of a communist state. However, human rights abuses continue as does the persecution of minorities.  Recent events have started to see a reversal of previous encouraging trends.    

So, there remains a tension between what represents a good and meaningful life individually versus the Confucian ideal of social harmony and allegiance to the state.
The contemplative practices are almost always tied to a fairly straightforward ethical framework.

Buddhist Ethics -5th century B.C. 

Buddhism teaches one is to purify the minds so that one has the capacity for loving kindness and compassion for all sentient beings. There are many various forms of Buddhism, but they all offer a systematic approach to understand the traits of character and actions that are the cause of our problems for both ourselves and others. It also offers ways that it proposes will assist in healing the suffering of the world. There is a step by step path that forbids destructive actions until one reaches an advanced form of spiritual development where one will act spontaneously (enlightenment) for the benefit of others.

Buddhist principles are based on a truth seeker, as such they are committed to scientific principles but whose objectives are to alleviate suffering, to be desirous of happiness, of good outcomes, to be supportive of individuals in their shared aspirations, to realize these values, to show compassion in the rendering of services and so on.

Western Ethics

Returning to our western heritage we have the Ethics of Plato 428/427 BE, Athens, Greece—died 348/347) talks about the highest conduct in life and the virtues required to attain it. Plato’s conceptual basis for happiness is not clear and he treats it in different ways- maybe because his ideas evolved during his life. His dialogues make reference to Socrates (469/470-399BC) who was his teacher.  

For Plato the soul must remain aloof and be separate to the pleasures of the body to obtain higher knowledge. In the same manner the individual must be subordinate to the community for the common good.

Plato thought moral values were absolute truths which spirit-like abstract entities. In that sense moral values were thought to be spiritual objects, which was refuted by Aristotle.   

The legacy of Aristotle

His philosophy shaped the Byzantine Philosophy during the period 730 to 1453 AD.

Ethics in Byzantium was not a formal discipline, but various responses to problems posed in relation to everyday life. It covered the full spectrum of ethical views on virtues and vices, evil and passions, the good, and how to observe the commandments and so on. In the Arabic world his influence was such that it became known as The First Teacher.

Thomas Aquinas 1225- 274 AD sought a reconciliation of Aristotle’s philosophy with Christian ideas and so Aquinas became the home of theological and philosophical underpinnings for Christianity that remains in many respects to continue to be its bedrock even today.

Today, philosophers regard him as the reliable sage for virtue ethics. 

Saint Augustine (354–430)

His authority was far reaching and his authority supplanted that of Aristotle’s, to be invoked on both sides of the Reformation.  His ideas on the problem of evil and on free remain a reference point today.

According to Augustine the existence of goodness must allow evil to exist, which is solely the fault of humans. He also influenced John Calvin, who supported Augustine's view and argued in turn that corrupted humans required God's grace to give moral guidance. Politically his theory of the stringent conditions to be satisfied to justify a war are still invoked today.

But medieval philosophers continued to talk about moral principles as "eternal laws" which were classified as spirit-like objects.

Moving into the more modern era

Following the enlightenment and more rational thinking in the 17^th century Samuel Clarke changed that definition spirit-like objects. Rather he talked about the idea GOD has willed the physical world into existence, just as was willed human life, so too are all the moral values willed into existence.

Sitting on the other side of the fence the sceptics denied values can be classified as spirit-like objects, to posit the idea moral values are purely human inventions.

Emotion and Reason- David Hume

Another important aspect to moral psychology concerns the role of reasoning as applied to moral actions.

David Hume argued that all our moral assessments must involve our emotions, and not our reason. He conceded reason might be of service in providing the context, but "reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions."

Over time various categories of ethics developed into 6 principal categories: normative, evolutionary, virtue, duty, consequential and applied. Applied refers to those issues which require application to the prior mentioned in responding to a thorny issue. 
The categorization is useful in helping explain ethics but is also somewhat arbitrary.

Normative Ethics

As previously outlined normative ethics invoke the golden rule or guiding principles that are generally agreed. Hence, one decides something is simply right or wrong by invoking the Golden Rule. However, inevitably what I desire may be different to someone else so that such a single rule can be highly subjective.

 In Confucius ethics we have the negative of the golden rule - what you don't want yourself, don't do to others.”

Evolutionary ethics favor the idea of fairness as it applies to the community to take precedence over individualism. From a biological perspective position there doesn’t seem to be any reason to favor self-interest over altruism. Certainly there is no evidence to support the selfish gene theories and those exposing only survival of the fittest that dominated discussions in the late sixties and seventies.    

Virtue ethics have surfaced in modernity as a credible source of reference, spearheaded by such philosophers as Alasdair Macintyre who has been a staunch defender of Aristotelian virtues, contending they all emerge from within social traditions.
As outlined previously morality consists of following precise rules of conduct, such as "don't kill," or "don't steal."

However virtue ethics places less emphasis on the rules and more on cultivating good character habits so that habitually these become part of who you are as in your good character.  

Plato talked principally about the four key virtues- wisdom, courage, temperance and justice. Others mentioned were fortitude, generosity, self-respect, good temper, and sincerity.

In addition to ensuring good character, virtue ethics talks about avoiding the vices in the first place by reverting to the virtues.

Hence Plato first emphasized the importance of moral education so that a virtuous character be instilled in the young so they might subsequently lead a virtuous life.

Aristotle then advanced the argument further by linking acquired good habits to controlling the emotions and declaring how we respond to live a virtuous life. 
Duty ethics cover almost all aspects of life to those who favor this approach. For most of us we don’t have to think about a duty to family and to the various organizations and institutions integral to our existence. To some extent there is an overlap to virtue ethics as what is determinant as a duty, has to be linked to what virtue makes such a duty valid. A duty approach provides meaning in the sense of pride as derives in selfless duty to serve others. The idea of duty could also include a duty to look after our own body.  They are sometimes called no consequence ethics because the duty does not have to have a consequence. In the metaphysical realm one might say one has a duty to a higher being or a higher self.
Consequentialism, as the name suggests, attempts to trace the result of decisions so that they become ethical only as far as they result in good outcomes. An example is the utilitarian philosophical school. The problem with consequentialism is you can’t always determine outcomes, unless the matter is rather obvious. The idea of attempting to evaluate all possible consequences has, of course, considerable merit.  

 

Following on the question arises as to make use of ethics in the partial outcomes that can be applied to existence. There are application stop day in every aspect of modern day life and particularly in economics.

 

Ethical outcomes are what underpin the reputation in organizations inclusive of the regulators charged with responsibility for the systems integrity. Early economists were in fact moral philosophers and we can apply Aristotelian ideas to the build environment. 

Herein we find the idea of a city-state can be fashioned on aristocratic nobility and justice principles for all and not as a business enterprise whose sole purpose is to maximize wealth.

Nor was it to be a place purely to promote liberty and equality, but rather he argued for a constitution based upon noble actions and in the virtuous sharing in the community.

Such ideas remain just as relevant for us today as there were then. For Aristotle was a philosopher who associated happiness with the habit of making virtuous choices so that by embracing such a disposition he asserted we build our moral compass to enable us to walk a virtuous path through the moral dilemma that life presents to us.

Conclusions

Many of the ideas of how to live and find meaning in the ancient wisdom streams are increasingly finding relevance to modern day thinking, to give impetus to the next generation to forge more meaningful and superior outcomes. 

The task of the philosopher is to continue to ask questions and advance those wisdom streams as far as they remain relevant to the new age we inhabit, that is the age of the humans. 

This will require a different way of thinking that will be contingent on a more empathetic approach to other cultures as we increasingly form a part of a global village. 

There is a need to develop universal secular ethical standards that provide us with a moral compass to live a meaningful life, but to leave the door open to imagination. Descriptive principles requiring imagination can lead the way to better outcomes, for you cannot legislate morality. One will inevitably fall off the ethical tightrope at times, so in humility one must in any system, leave room to consult the moral compass, to steer her back on track without fear or favor.  
The future then of religion and philosophy lies in introspection and to meditate on the ongoing rich narrative that remains freely (barring mental disorders) available to us.