Insecurity => creativity LO10998

Benjamin B. Compton (bcompton@geocities.com)
Thu, 14 Nov 1996 20:23:13 -0700

Replying to LO10963 --

Durval Muniz de Castro wrote:

> Morality is not a binary quality, maybe we can say it is a scalar, with
> various levels exhibiting different properties. The highest level of
> morality is not subjected to rules ("Love and do as you wish"), while the
> lowest levels consist in prudently following rules.

This is rather humanistic. "Love and do as you wish," is an interesting
philosophy. The other night my wife asked me what I thought "morality"
was. I think she regrets the question. Before answering her question, I
asked her what she thought morality was. She said, in her opinion,
morality was contextual according to the culture of an individual. She
criticized the monks who never marry, feeling that was an immoral
lifestyle. When I asked why, she said "Because the sex drive is so
natural. Marriage is the natural expression of our sexuality." Mmmm. . .

So I followed her logic: "Basically you're saying that because sex is
pleasurable it is immoral not to be married, and thus deny yourself the
pleasure of sex?" (Leaving the question of sex outside of marriage aside
for the moment.) "Of course," she said. To which I had no choice but to
reply, "So you'd have to say that it would be moral for me to remain your
husband and still have sex with other women, if I found it pleasurable"?
"Absolutely not! Why? Are you having sex with other women?" (The answer to
that question is my own business, sorry, no explanation here.)

I think we should be careful when we say morality is doing that which we
love and wish, unless of course we're willing to accept all the
implications of such a statement. If one "loves and wishes" to murder,
then we'd have to say, "Hey, thats ok, its what that person likes." I have
a small problem with that idea.

And what if a manager loves and wishes to play head games with his/her
employees? And the list can go on and on. . .

> It is difficult to evaluate if our morality is worse now than in the past.
> Things that were hidden in the past are now brought to the open. Will that
> make us better or worse?
>
> Morality is manifested in behavior through culture. Thus, the same
> behavior may express different morality levels in different cultures.

Which implies there is no such thing as moral absoluteness. Is that an
accurate assessment of your comment? If so, then what do you think of
Covey's "Principle-Centered Leadership"? Are there principles which
should be used as a guide for everyones life? And if so, are they the
principles Covey espouses? (I've argued more than once that Covey's 7
Habits will help a person become more happy and successful, but so will a
lot of other 7 Habits. My friends that work at Covey get quite perturbed
when I say this, so I say it often.)

-- 
Ben Compton
The Accidental Learning Group                  Work: (801) 222-6178
Improving Business through Science and Art     bcompton@geocities.com
http://www.e-ad.com/ben/BEN.HTM
 

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>