Morality unpreached [thus unenforced] is powerless.
Morality often subverts actions; it is a subtle sort of power which reduces, encourages and aborts certain parts of the will.
Those who want morality – want control.
Morality is a form of control, which is not direct physical force, but it is a different means to the same end.
Morality is usually:
Male imperialism.
Sure, Dan~. But this may be merely control over oneself. That’s what perspectivist morality is, for instance.
But as soon as morality is preached [which it always is], then it becomes control over others.
That surely is the point of preaching, yes. I would like to make a distinction - not to you, in particular, Dan~, but just to the aether. Making a moral judgement (aloud) is not preaching. It’s just making a moral judgement, aloud. Preaching has a different intent, which you, Dan~, have covered nicely.
Can we explore the notion of whether or not control is a bad thing? Do some people ‘need’ to be controlled?
Sure.
Seems to me that calling morality ‘control’ is a tricky thing- there’s plenty of cases when morals are enforced on the end of a bayonet, sure. But I’m guessing Dan~ has the Church in mind, because of the forum we’re in. The Church exerts control through what a person could call ‘brainwashing’ if they disagree, or ‘education’ if they do agree. What’s the difference between control and education?
We can be educated to be uncontrolable.
I think that control can be good or bad for a person, it all depends.
Also, ‘brainwashing’ is atleast not as harsh as brute force.
Even if someone is brainwashed [extensively encouraged] to believe in one thing, he is still free to believe in many other things which have not been extensively encouraged.
Education is different then a direct target towards some person’s judgment facalties [whereas ethical and moral education is often a target towards the judgmental parts of the human mind which partial to good and bad].
Eduation is still a form of influance, but with far less secret intent for control over the individual.
I look at morality as a personal thing -ie- there are places I will or will not go. This is true for all of us, regardless the ‘source’. To the extent that we must share the same resources or work together to accomplish, then control can no longer be avoided. The issue now becomes self-control, negotiated (compromise) control, or coerced control.
faust makes the correct distinction. Telling you how I am is one thing. Telling you how you must be is quite another. But I also understand Dan’s point that in most social settings, coercion is the rule. There isn’t anything negative in this by default. The larger and more complex the group, the greater need for minimum agreement in terms of behaviors. While self-control is possible, it isn’t likely. Negotiated control happens, but infrequently. We coerce and are coerced in larger society.
I’ve gotten into hot water here in the forums for calling social mores “social engineering”, but I think it is a more apt description of reality than calling it morality…
“Social engineering” is a good name for it.
I think advertising is the main fuel of morality today.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Dan~,
I’m not sure how this works. Agreed that advertising creates an image of polarity - what I look llike without and what I would look like with, but that is only the superficial. It seems to me that there are several more variables involved. The only exception I can see is political ads and usually of the negative sort. “Jones is against family values” and that kind of crap.
I would argue that most of our ‘social engineering’ is tied to golden rule: He who has the gold, makes the rules.
You didn’t make that statement without reason, explain the connects please?
Yes dan! Yes! Eureka! Yes! Exactly!
It feels good to hear you say that.
=)
Avertising → display of → indoctrination through mass production of a specific opinion, which later gains momentum, which later becomes dogma.
You mean the economy controls the morality and the military both at the same time? In uncontrolled capitalism?