America and the supposed moral decline...

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I post this here because of issue’s impact on both politics and social policy.

I am sure that if you live in America you have been exposed to some form of argument that contends America is in moral decline ( which I take to mean America has moved away from previously accepted behavioural norms and practices).

I would like to ask some questions pertaining to this and see where the discussion leads.

1)First, obviously, do you believe America is in a moral decline?

2)If you believe so would you care to characterize or list those norms and practices you believe are representative of being truly ethical?

3)The term decline brings with an image of slow descent, if such is the case, what or when was Amercia’s moral zenith and why would you argue that such is the case (asuming that someone does)?

4)Would you recognize or admit the possibility of a gulf between idealized norms and practices and the actual behavior as practiced by the majority of people?

5)What numbers are sufficient to justify the claim of a moral decline? By this I mean, how many people must be acting in manner X to give credence to the claim that an entire nation behaves in a way similar to manner X?

6)Assuming you believe that a moral decline is occurring, what would you advocate as a means to combat this? Or do you believe that such a thing is beyond repair?

7)What epistemological foundation ( or should I say criterion) do you use to qualify your arguments? Empirical, Rational, Faith, some form of outright subjective reasoning, or something else entirely?

:sunglasses:Are you aware of any attributes of this supposed moral decline that are or were once considered virtues by other cultures or perhaps even our own? Also are you aware of any attributes we might consider virtues that were once considerd unethical by other cultures or perhaps even our own at another time?

9)Do you think of morality as being something static (it is always wrong to do X, always good to do Y) or do you think morality evolves and /or de-evolves (what was wrong today can be good tomorrow, and vice versa).

10)Do you believe that morality is something that can be represented by words, or by actions, or by both, or perhaps by something else, or by absolutely nothing?

11)Finally, what norms and practices do you think will become accepted in the future, if any?

An advanced Thank You for any and all replies.

2

In a general sense, I’d say we probably romanticize our past and suffer from “Golden Age Syndrome,” but to a degree I think there’s been an erosion of “core values” that used to be somewhat universal. One of the biggest areas has been in business, where a level of corruption is common today that would have been far more unacceptable in the past. And the profit motives of the largest corporations have begun to erode government policies and encroach on civil liberties to a degree that’s not been seen in a century (at least since modern-ish labor laws began).

I guess the problem with the entire question is that it’s a relative thing. I could say things are better since there’s more tolerance for things like homosexuality and more acceptance of minorites. But of course, those are exactly the things that a certain segment of our population points to as a symptom of our moral decline.

Since I’m something of a moral relativist (at least for the moment), I’d say it depends upon who you ask. I think the country is getting ruder and more boorish, and that the values I appreciate (eg honesty, compassion, loyalty) are in decline. But another might say those are just outmoded concepts.

I guess I didn’t really answer any of those questions, did I? :blush:

3

Ya know, we have this other thread where i think of you as this greedy bastard who wants to eat poor childen and then make this post where you almost sound like some flaming liberal. :stuck_out_tongue:

Not accusing, I mean that in the kindest sense, and I hope it serves to illustrate what I think you hit on and what I feel is the answer (though my opinions change).

The idea of a public morality as determined by a society is simply a narrative, usually descriptive. Each of us, as individuals, struggle with the same questions every day ( I say struggle but it is not a struggle for some). But for most though, lacking in some absolute certainty of right and wrong, we are left to hope that we can do our best, or if not, that hindsight provides a nice view of things.

I guess what I am saying is that morality, whatever it is, is just as likely to be something else as it is what any group might want it to be. If so then there can be no decline, because ultimately, there is no agreement on what it is to begin with.

Anyway, don’t take my last post in that other thread too harshly. besides you and me Phaedrus, do we really need anyone else to tell us what is good? :stuck_out_tongue:

4

Nice one! :laughing:

Anyway, I think liberals tend to be pretty rigid in their thinking. So do conservatives, for that matter. It’s pretty silly for those of either political bent to suppose their party has a monopoly on compassion or common sense. Most have neither.

I think much of the yearning for “the good old days” is rose colored romanticism. But it’s true that there’s been an enormous change in the world over the last 100 years the likes of which the world has rarely, if ever seen.

Consider a teenager on the banks of the Nile, say, 4000 years ago. Sure, he perhaps think his mummy doesn’t understand him (ouch- sorry, couldn’t help it! :blush: ), but really how much change did he experience? His clothing, tools, religion and world view probably wasn’t much different than his fathers, grandfathers or great-grandfathers. Oh sure, different dynasties had some quirks, but go with me. For long stretches of human civilization, things changed very gradually if at all.

The industrial revolution really changed all this. We used to percieve time by the seasons of the year or if it was high sun or mid nite. But the industrial revolution required stricter time, to regulate the trains and the lives of the workers. Things became regimented. The concept of The Workweek began. And as technology snowballed, the pace of change outpaced our ability to internalize it.

Finally the pace of travel created a situation where cultures totally isolated for millenia now bang head to head daily. Empire carries diametrically opposed ideas about change and the human role in the universe headlong into places where they’re not always welcome. As these polar opposites meet, we begin to wonder if the things we’ve always believed in are really true. Are all the Muslims really wrong, or was I raised wrong?

Is it any wonder that in the face of all this change, people are looking for some cultural and moral anchor to keep them from getting swept away? Perhaps the world is spiraling down the shitter, or maybe we just need time to adjust to this sea change.

5

-Imp

6

Change is inevitable, but feared, and so we try to remain anchored in our ideals while the rest of the universe behaves as if it drifts with no anchor – and it does.

Saying “truly ethical” is like saying “real dream”.

Growth and decline are subjectively or group-subjectively determined, and there are as many ways to chart growth/decline as there are people with internalized values.

Yes, one example being that most people value fidelity but practice infidelity to varying degrees. One could argue they actually value infidelity if they practice it, but actually there are many ways and reasons attitudes can conflict with actual behavior… and this conflict may mark a period of changing attitudes.

Value-change happens one individual at a time. Replace “moral decline” and “acting in manner X” and “behaves in a way similar to manner X” with “declined value in tying one’s shoes” and “no longer tying their shoes” and “no longer ties their shoes”, keeping in mind that value and behavior may not coincide. What numbers would be required there? There’s your answer. If you don’t care about shoe-tying, you will have no interest in charting its growth or decline.

I don’t know whether it’s getting better or worse (from my point of view) – I see positives, I see negatives, and I haven’t figured out which is greater (pos/neg) (there are too many factors, and I am not omniscient). Subjectively, I would advocate parents learn how to develop emotional intelligence in their children. That’s just off the top of my head, you would have to be more specific to get a more complete answer.

I don’t know, you tell me. You can rule out religion.

Yes.

I think of morality as ever-changing. On the “wrong today, good tomorrow” thing – I’m going to quote someone now (that someone is Alaine Locke):

“It is, moreover, an oversimplification of the form of relativism under discussion, functional relativism, to say that it merely calls to our attention that what is good today is bad tomorrow [or vice versa]. This interpretation of value is more properly represented by a statement that what is revealed or developed in experience as better becomes the new good, shifting the position of normative acceptance or urgency formerly occupied by the older value concept. The process of continuity of the normative character of values is demonstrated not merely by the substitution of new value content for the old, but even more clearly by the displacement and retroactive devaluing of the old, a procedure which transforms yesterday’s good into a relatively bad.” – Locke

There are both verbal and nonverbal forms of communication (which are also done), and what we feel subjectively or group-subjectively is right/good, wrong/bad, can both be done in thought (per individual, unless we learn how to read eachother’s thoughts and think ‘together’) or deed, nonverbal or verbally.

That is too broad of a question.