At the beginning of the play, To Kill A Mockingbird, Scout Finch is conflicted with the “fact” that Bob Ewell fell on his knife.
At the conclusion of the play, Scout Finch accepts that Bob Ewell fell on his knife.
Upon thinking that his son, Jem Finch, stabbed Bob Ewell, Atticus Finch is resolute that the legal process must still be followed. Later, after consultation with Sheriff Heck Tate and Judge Taylor, Atticus accepts that Bob Ewell fell on his knife.
“It depends.”
Moral relativism reminds us that morality is relative to this or that.
Near the end of the play Scout says, “…you know, there was a religious man who once said, “Lord, I don’t always know the right thing to do, but I think my desire to please you pleases you.”
There is no right thing to do. Right is relative to. And things change. Perspectives change, zeitgeists change, cultural norms change. Ergo, our morality is relative.
To make a finer relativistic point, Scout says, “Isn’t that what decency is? Trying to do the right thing is the right thing…”
Bob Ewell fell on his knife. We certainly could not run Bob Ewell “falling on his knife” through Kant’s categorical imperative - what if all people acted this way in a similar situation? - and find resolution.
It depends.
Bob Ewell was despised enough that the legal process for his death was not worth it. And this came from Atticus who is heavy handed in the play making the case to see the good in everyone.
It depends.
This dependence, this contextualization, this relativism, doesn’t doom us, it doesn’t entail a slippery slope to anarchy and violence on an unforeseen scale. In fact the anarchy and violence we’ve seen throughout history has always occurred right along with the moral realists claiming their right and wrong “no matter what.” Still those supposed lines were crossed every minute of every day. What is the point of proposing morals if they don’t work, even as concepts? One can ask after reading a history book, “Where is the power of your morals?”
Let us say you are running an organization and one problem you deal with is people killing one another. Now along comes a guy with a spiel for your problem; he says, we’re going to say it is immoral to kill other people. He says we’re going to tell them it is objectively wrong to kill one another. He says we’re going to tell them “no matter what.” Never ok.
And you shell out the dough for the product: Morality. Objective morality.
And now let us analyze the effectiveness of the product via history books.
The product is a failure. People kill each other.
Why doesn’t morality work, at all? Where is the power of objective morality?
People fearing relativism isn’t the same as the success of morality. Morality fails, consistently; all one needs to do is read the newspaper to understand this.
Fearing relativism as a slippery slope is tantamount to turning down $30,000 of help for your $100,000 loan because it doesn’t pay it ALL off.
Relativism, a la To Kill A Mockingbird, will help us live and move through the world in a healthier fashion, even if there is no perfect state of healthiness.
Bob Ewell fell on his knife.
No comments:
Post a Comment