It’s all a matter of perspective…
You’re reading these words right now.
OR
(Read this in your best fast-paced, nerdy voice:)
You’re using your eyes to obtain information from the pixels on your screen that form various symbols with specified meanings in the so-called “languages” that homo sapiens use as a form of verbal communication. Your brain is processing these ….
(In your best posh and articulate voice:)
The “yellow” bed sheet was to signify the warmth of the sun that has radiated upon Jimmy’s life as he transforms from the immature being he once was, into the transcendent spirit that envelops the adventures of a newfound independence.
OR
The author said the bed-sheet was yellow, probably ’cause Jimmy wet the bed… since he’s like 4 years old.
The Earth is round
OR
The Earth is flat, and all 71 of the world’s space agencies are lying, as well as the thousands of astrologists, astronomers and astronauts who are getting paid to pretend to do useless jobs.
(Some people legit believe this. [1] )
Global warming is a real threat to our existence, as well as all life on Earth, and we must make real changes in our lifestyles if we are to battle against it!
OR
Global warming is Earth’s fever, enacting it’s rightful destruction of the bacteria that we, human beings, are…
Although some of those were pretty strange examples, you probably got the point:
Everything can be interpreted differently. Or, you could even go as far as saying everything can be interpreted in an infinite amount of ways.
It depends on your culture, experiences, religion, atheism, childhood, DNA, eyebrow width, EVERYTHING!
What does this mean?
There’s a philosophical belief called Relativism that makes a conclusion based on this: everything is relative, it’s all just based on your interpretation. Nothing is really true because truth is a consequence of your circumstances, culture, etc.
If this is applied to ethics (Moral Relativism), there are no true morals either, nothing is really right or wrong.
That kinda makes sense… and it sounds pretty freeing to be honest!
Well, it isn’t actually as great as it sounds…
Moral relativism is not the same as saying “circumstances matter”. Obviously, punching someone out of self-defence isn’t the same thing ethically as punching someone because they have a cooler t-shirt than you. Just like, if you’re given money by someone, it makes a difference whether you’ve just sold them a cookie or you’re pointing a gun at their face. The doctrine is also not the same thing as saying it’s okay that people have some different beliefs about morality. That’s also agreed upon by pretty much everyone.
It’s the conclusion that’s the issue; since there’s disagreement about morality and context is always important, there are no true moral beliefs. This means there’s no way to determine that any action is really more valid than another.
So, what problems does this lead to and why is it a bit silly?
Everyone’s crappy behaviour can be justified.
To say all moral actions are valid, is to also support the potentially dangerous and destructive ones that do exist.
These actions can be justified as morally correct, since they’re just a product of the actor’s circumstances, culture or whatever factors that may have an impact on them. If someone or a group of people truly start believing “genocides are a pretty smart thing to do!”, you’re not allowed to intervene. We should just tolerate and respect the interpretation that’s true to them… Yeah, just go ahead and accept genocide, what a bright idea! (CLEAR SARCASM)
This same justification can be applied to your personal life; your moral actions are all valid given the context. So, you can easily just blame everything on your experiences, culture, genetics, etc., shifting all responsibility away from you. You’re just doomed by the world, so now it’s morally correct for you to not give a sh!t and behave however crappily you wish. And the more you shift that responsibility away, the harder it’ll be to make your life any better, as you have less and less control over the direction it takes.
The reduction of crappy behaviours wouldn’t even make sense
Even if we wanted to improve ourselves morally, relativism dictates there’s no real ethically correct standard to compare our crappy behaviours to. Changing our actions would never be real moral progress towards an ideal standard, just a new ‘opinion’.
There would have been no reason to abolish slavery, and the reduction of discrimination and inequalities wouldn’t be seen as real moral improvements for our society, but simply as different perspectives. And why would we make the effort to pursue these new “random” perspectives?
Why make the effort to pursue ANY perspectives? There are no right decisions and every “hypothetically” moral action you took to make your life or other people’s lives better, would be pointless. And if no action is really better than another, why the hell would you make any decisions at all? Just live life in indecisiveness, meaningless chaos… Sounds like an awful lot of fun!
Disagreement doesn’t mean everyone is right
Just because a small minority of people don’t believe in climate change, that the Earth is round, or that biology has any impact whatsoever on gender differences, does not make any of these true.
If someone disagrees with reality and believes they can transform themselves into a lizard, they will not become a lizard.
People disagree about everything you could think of, but that does not mean everyone is right.
With other (maybe more reasonable) disagreements, such as about the causes of climate change, inequalities, war, depression, etc., even though there exist different answers for all of them, we can’t just conclude “THERE EXIST NO REAL CAUSES!” if we ever want to find viable solutions… (and the expert who shouts that out during a meeting will probably get fired).
Likewise, it’d be bizarre to conclude that disagreement in ethics means there are no ‘real’ morals. As I mentioned before, (just in case you somehow impossibly didn’t see the “CLEAR SARCASM”) if an extremely small minority would disagree about the immorality of genocides, this would not mean that they are neither right or wrong
Regardless of the fact that many disagreements exist and we don’t have all the ethical answers, doesn’t mean the best option is to just abandon the search for them.
Plus, there’s less disagreement than we might think
Obviously there are cultural differences between countries. If I were to slurp soup or noodles on the dinner table in front of my family, they’d probably get uncomfortable and tell me to shut up. On the other hand, this is something completely normal, and even expected in China and Japan to show appreciation of the food. Neither of these are absolutely right or wrong, and these cultural customs should be respected.
However, this doesn’t imply that there’s absolutely nothing all societies agree on. There actually exist more shared values than you might think. For example, certain laws are necessary so that a society can exist in the first place.
If a society had the laws: “try to be as unproductive as possible, make everyone’s life a living hell, lie about everything, destroy everything and everyone you see”, it’s pretty clear they wouldn’t survive for very long!
But, wait a second… maybe then, if all of human existence is gone, there will no longer be any REAL MORAL ACTIONS! YES, YES, YES, FINALLYYY!
AMAZING jokes aside, there’s no functioning or happy person/society that runs on the idea that increased unnecessary suffering and lying is the right ethical answer. Among others, these are fundamental principles agreed upon worldwide, but how they’re put in place often differ in various cultures. When these fundamental principles are disobeyed is when the most horrific scenes present themselves, as we unfortunately saw on several occasions during the 20th century.
Relativism doesn’t even make sense!
Although I’ve mainly focused on moral relativism, I thought I’d add a contradiction about relativism in regards to truth (which I think is kinda funny… you might not, but oh well!)
Just look at the statement: “Truth is relative”.
So, this statement is either true or relative.
- If it’s true, well that just shows there are some things that aren’t relative, such as this statement.
- If it’s relative, it means this statement isn’t always true, so real truths are possible.
Ohhh, get wrecked!!!
What’s another answer to the “infinite interpretation” issue?
“An endless number of interpretations, certainly: that is not different than saying an endless number of problems. But a seriously bounded number of viable solutions. Otherwise life would be easy. And it’s not.” – Dr. Jordan Peterson in 12 Rules for Life,
Jordan Peterson highlights that although we have an “endless number of problems”, we do not have an endless number of “viable solutions”, which is why every interpretation isn’t right. And we know that because otherwise everyone could freely choose whatever interpretation they wanted, and all would be fine and dandy. But that’s not the case.
So, if we are to make the world a better place (that rhyme was unintentional), and make things suck a bit less, we have to make distinctions: some moral actions must be right or wrong.
As a start, striving to increase the unnecessary suffering of yourself and everyone around you, today and as far into the future as possible, is wrong; that’s agreed upon by every person who wants things to be better.
If you’re looking for “what’s right?”, maybe we can look at the opposite of that: striving to reduce the unnecessary suffering of yourself and everyone else, so that not only today is less crappy, but also tomorrow, and as far out into the future as you can.
And sometimes we’re wrong, sometimes we’re really wrong. Messed up practices, such as slavery were a part of everyday life, not long ago. Atrocious things happened in the 20th century, in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, just to name two. We definitely don’t have it sorted out yet either, but it’s something we gotta keep figuring out instead of abandoning.
On a personal level, before we decide that our lives are damned for eternity, we should consider whether we have the right interpretation. If we hold no responsibility for our life and how we react to its circumstances; believe that life is meaningless; are resentful and hateful of the people around us; and want to take revenge on people and existence itself… we probably (and hopefully) have the wrong interpretation!
So, in a world of infinite interpretations, figure out the right one that leads you to do the most good for yourself, the people around you, and to become the person you’ve always dreamed of being.
Do you have a better way to spend your (literally) once in a life-time opportunity?
Read More:
Motivation isn’t Enough, You Need to Be Driven
10 Reasons to Choose a Meaningful Life
Nihilism: 9 Reasons it’s So Popular
Sources:
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rsy5u8LkP-Q
12 Rules for Life, Dr. Jordan Peterson, p.311
Aim High Start Low 