practical inquiry regarding meaning » value » morality / valuable for us / our 'ought'
Practicing morality involves doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. This involves developing the ability to adopt an objective point of view—that of an impartial spectator, which, as internalized, we call the conscience—one that doesn't play favorites but sees everyone's concerns as equally worthy of moral consideration. From this objective point of view, when faced with a moral dilemma, we might consider how an impartial spectator would feel about the choice (moral sentimentalism), what we'd want anyone to do in that situation as a general rule (deontology), what action will bring about the most favorable consequences for the most number of those affected (utilitarianism), or any number of other guiding reflections provided by moral philosophy. But in each case, we're gathering facts about the situation from an objective point of view to determine how to respond. We place ourselves in the shoes of the anyone and proceed accordingly.
We all tend to do this at a small scale at least. If we take objectivity to mean intersubjectivity, objectivity becomes an expression of group identity. We identify with a common point of view held by all memebers of a group. From this intersubjective point of view we collect facts as interpreted from that point of view and proceed in a way that benefits the anyone within that group. But some groups are larger than others. We'll defend the interests of our friends and family, but when those interests conflict with other groups' interests, we'll tend to prefer those of our smaller, more immediate group rather than the larger group that encompasses both smaller groups. The practical question becomes, at which level do we find our moral home?
A task of morality will be to practice attending to as many of these levels as possible. This will involve a form of empathy that takes effort. We need to make the effort to understand how actions affect others even when we don't already understand those others. From this informed standpoint, we'll be able to determine the relevance any act will have to all those who will be affected by it and negotiate a solution that honors the degree to which each group is impacted by the action. When there is equal conflict, we'll need to zoom out a level and place the conflicting concerns in dialogue with each other with reference to those things the groups have in common. Negotiation and diplomatic skills will be important to develop.
Yet the question remains: how far out might we zoom? The answer must be as far as we can find experience. Non-human animals have experiences—actions affect them—and so they're worthy of moral consideration. And, for example, given the reality of global climate change, we're being forced to take into moral consideration a point of view that extends beyond that of animal life even—namely that of the ecosystem as a whole with all the myriad lifeforms involved therein. Said another way, the concerns of the planet today and the concerns of our children and grandchildren tomorrow align.
