It's Good to Know - April 2008

Novelist Earnest Hemingway was once quoted as saying, “What is moral is what you feel good after, and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.” Ernest Hemingway also ended his life with suicide. To some, my connecting Hemingway's moral stance with his suicide is offensive; but what if it made me feel good to do it? Even Hemingway himself would have to agree that, for me, there was nothing immoral about it. But is that true?

     Defined in short-sleeve English, ethics is the study of right and wrong. In our continuing study of worldviews we will see that people believe ethics to be objective and situational, absolute and relative as well as non-existent. The gain is in realizing how a person's ethical views inform the choices they make which may also impact you.

     For Christians, our ethics are derived from God. What is right or wrong for the Christian is what God declares as right and wrong. Yet for reasons which will become apparent in the following paragraph, it is important for the Christian to understand that this ethical code is rooted in who God is. Lying is wrong, not simply because God declares it, but rather that he declares it because it violates His character. Adultery is wrong because it does not conform to the faithfulness of who God is. Because these ethics are rooted in the person of God, they are understood as absolute for all people regardless of culture or time. This moral law is as real and binding to humanity as the laws of physics. One can no more reject the moral law than they can the law of gravity. Just as there are consequences for jumping off a cliff without a parachute so there are consequences for lying even if those consequences be delayed. The consequence of breaking a moral law, of violating the character of God, is sin.

     Islam is similar to Christianity in that it too has a moral order which is objective and absolute and is also coming from God. Yet Islam teaches that God cannot ultimately be known and morals are based on God's character which cannot be known, so you should follow the moral code simply because God decrees it as so.

     The humanist rejects the idea of good and evil because they point to realities outside of the natural world. Yet there is much disagreement among humanists over the existence of morality. Some argue that morality, while never absolute, is a set of of social conventions agreed to by humans to satisfy their needs. It is thought that reason can be used as a guide for moral conduct. But tension surfaces when the humanist considers Darwin's survival of the fittest. Terms like “good” and “right” should be defined by those in power. This, for the humanist, would mean endorsing events like the Holocaust as this was simply the case of the stronger imposing its will on the weaker.

     Marxism endorses the idea of morality, even objective morality. But the standard for the Communist is not the Bible or the character of God, but rather the advancement of the communist cause. In other words, right and wrong is determined by what is best for the cause of the working class. The end justifies the means. By one estimate, communism has been responsible for 83 million deaths worldwide, but these deaths are considered good because they advanced the cause of the working class. In the former Soviet Union there were laws in direct conflict with one another meaning that at any time a person could be found guilty. This was not a moral dilemma because it was used for the eradication of communism's enemies.

     The New Agers believe that each individual is God and the standard for morality is found in each individual's inner truth. We must listen to the “God within” to determine what is right and wrong for us personally. Tolerance then becomes the great good. The great wrong is in judging others apparently even if the “God within” leads you to do so. That's not to be tolerated.

     Postmodernists believe that there is not objective absolute morality, but instead view morality as residing in the local community. This standard can be changed as the community evolves or decides. Morals and ethics are “negotiated” in a sense when ideas are voiced, considered and either adopted or rejected by the community at any certain point and time. This struggle of ideas is constantly taking place and therefore the community's moral values are in a consistent state of flux.

     Why does this matter? Because we live in a society where each worldview is said to be equally valid. Where tolerance is the highest virtue except for those morals which are objective and absolute. Where the end justifies the means as long as the end is approved by the majority or the strongest whichever the case may be at the moment. Where true freedom is the ability to do as you please according to your inner desires as long as those desires don't subject you to a code of conduct you choose not to believe in.

     Why does it matter? Maybe C.S. Lewis put it best, “We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.”