July 22, 2005

I Might As Well Jump in on This
Everett

Let's get controversial right away. As far as morality is concerned, there can be no such thing as right or wrong if there is no God: It all comes down to personal preference.

Now then, this begs a rather obvious question: How can that assertion be made definitively? Simply put, to declare something right or wrong in any sense is to declare its consistency or inconsistency with a governing law or set of laws. For example, the statement 2+2=4 is right because it is consistent with the laws of mathematics, while the statement 3+6=457890 is wrong because it is inconsistent with the laws of mathematics. Likewise, the flight of most birds is consistent with the laws of physics, while the flight of cows is not*. Similarly, in order for a human action to be considered right or wrong from a moral standpoint, it must be consistent with a natural moral law.

Here we start to run into trouble because human beings are clearly capable of and have done things that we can call immoral. In other words, they have acted in a way that is inconsistent with the moral law. You don't run into this with laws of science or mathematics. If something is contrary to these laws, it doesn't exist in reality.** On the other hand, the natural moral law, if it exists, describes not how people do act, but how they ought to act, much like civil law (in theory). How then can the natural moral law indeed be a universal moral law if it does not fully govern our actions? If the moral law is to be considered law, it must then be rooted in an authority of some sort. Furthermore, if it is to be a law that applies to the whole of nature, this authority must necessarily be a supernatural one, exercising dominion over the whole of the universe. Such a being must necessarily be not just a god, but the God.

Furthermore, because he is a supernatural being exercising authority over the entire universe, the laws of nature, be they the laws of physics, chemistry, mathematics, or morality, are laws because they are declarations of his will. Therefore, 2+2=4 and F=MA because GOd has willed them to be so (i.e., that's how he made it). Similarly, whether an action (or inaction) is right or wrong is determined by whether or not it is consistent with the will of God.

Now, while you're busy gaping at some of the bases I've stolen in that section, I'd like to change gears a bit and address the question at hand: What determines the morality of an action? In assessing the morality of an action (or inaction), there are three things to be considered: ends intended; ends achieved; and means employed.

Let's take a rather absurd case. I'm hungry, and I decide I want a pizza. I think we can agree that getting a pizza to satiate my hunger is a morally acceptable thing to do.

Now, I walk into Little Caesar's and order a Hot'N'Ready pepperoni pizza, get it and leave without paying for it. Is this justified because the intended end of acquiring a pizza to relieve my hunger is justified? No.

Now, let's get ridiculous. Let's say I walk into the same Little Caesar's, but instead of looking to get a pizza for myself, I'm looking to get a pizza for some homeless guy I happened to run across. Furthermore, let's say thatinstead of simply taking the pizza without paying for it, I held the Little Caesar's up at gunpoint and demanded a Hot'N"Ready pepperoni pizza. To add to the absuridty, let's say that I get back to the bum, and when he opens the box he finds, to both his surprise and mine, an inflatable chainsaw instead of a pizza. Does my intention to get food for someone in need justify my robbing the Little Caesar's at gunpoint, especially when the box had an inflatable chainsaw instead of a pizza? Not in the least.

Simply put, while intent may lessen moral culpability or laudability, the ends actually attained and the means employed to attain them trump it when assessing moral acceptability. After all, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

*And no, I am not equating launching cows into the air with trebuchets with flight.

**If there's interest, we can discuss whether numbers are in any sense real or if they're simply highly useful abstractions.