Few are guilty but all are responsible. –Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel
How is it possible for ‘reasoning’ to decide between my values and yours, especially between our core values? Values do not claim truth in any scientific sense; however they do claim ‘rightness.’ They do not declare what is so but what should be so. I cling to my values; you cling to your values (you might remember, gentle reader, that in Afganhi the verb ‘to cling’ is the same as the verb ‘to die’). Some of your values might not hold for me; some of mine might not hold for you. Some of your values may be repulsive to me or even threaten me; some of my values may be repulsive to you or even threaten you. What then? To what ‘court’ of reason shall we approach? From what court of reason would we both accept a judgment?
As far as I am able to discern there is no such court – this seems to be a ‘fact’ about core values. It is a fundamental fact. It can be a terrifying fact. It can also be a challenging fact. This fact gives me, you, and us our lonely autonomy – our response-ability and our responsibility. We humans have more than the choice to obey or disobey. If I accept authority I also choose the authority I accept. I am responsible [response-able] not only to others, but more deeply, to myself.
Does all of this mean that a universal ethical principle, applicable to all of us, even when – perhaps especially when – our values diverge if not conflict, is impossible? That there is, in the end, no rule to go by, based on reason itself.
There appears to be no rule that can prescribe both my core values and yours or that can decide between them. On the other hand, there appears to be one universal rule that can be laid down, on ethical grounds – that is, apart from the creeds of particular religions and apart from the ways of the family, or clan or tribe or state or nation. What might this rule be?
Do to others as you would have others do to you. The Golden Rule, which appears in many faith and philosophical traditions [in a previous posting I listed many of the faith and philosophical traditions where it is found]. This is the rule that stands by itself in the light of its own reason, the rule that can stand by itself in the naked, warring universe, in the face of the contending values of individuals and groups.
Why might this be so? First, this universal is one of ‘procedure.’ It prescribes a mode of behaving, not a goal of action. On the level of goals, of core values, there seems to continue to be irreconcilable conflict. For example, one rule prescribes humility, another pride; one prescribes abstinence, another commends lust, etc. – there are endless variations. As humans we wish that our principle could be the universal principle; some of us even believe it should be. Our ‘ought’ should be everyone’s ‘ought.’ BUT, we do differ and so this will not happen (in the foreseeable future anyway).
Consider that when we want to make our ethical principle prevail we set out to ‘convert’ the other. Some may respond positively; some may resist violently; some will seek to ‘convert’ us – why shouldn’t they? If we are strong enough we can resort to force, to coerce the other; or we can resort to bribing the other [of course both of these could also happen to us]. Even if we were to become masters of the world our principle would not become universal.
Consider that when we attempt to make our values prevail over those cherished by others, we end up attacking their values [if we live long enough we will, indeed, experience this; we might even be the perpetrators]. If we carry this far enough we end up assaulting their very being.
For me, the deep beauty of the golden rule is that instead of attacking the other it offers the other a different path: “Do as you would have others…” Put another way: As you would will others to do. It invites us to expand our vision, to see ourselves in new relationships. It invites us to see ourselves in the place of others and see others in our place. It invites us to test our values via our thought, motivation and behavior. If I would disapprove of you treating me as I treat you would this not be one sign that I am, in fact, mistreating you?
If you were already in possession of the Truth, it would be reflected in your flawless behavior. –Epictetus
Searcher-Seeker 