Ethics

The understanding of the notion of morality is always different to different people. To many people and societies, morality is the obedience and respect to the authority, either parents or leaders in the society. This notion is very dangerous and has led to abuse of authority and other social evils. This essay seeks to highlight the dangers that prevail out of this understanding.

Morality is a code of conduct. It is a behavioral system that has been established among social animals so as to regulate their social interactions. These behaviors are characteristic of social beings living under particular conditions, the society or community. Under these conditions, the behavior of one of the social being causes an effect to everyone. Majority of us have a very negative understanding of what morality entails. This is the reason the reaction of people towards the notion of morality is also negative. People have the tendency of associating morality with religion. To many of us morality is like the respects and obedience to the rules and regulations that are set up by our parents or other authorities. Those who understand morality from this perspective strive to obey the rules and regulations regardless or whether they are right or wrong. They do not seem to care how pointless the rules and regulations are. This understanding bases morality with a mustiness. That being moral is obeying the power that be. This understanding also restricts morality to whatever the authorities define as right or wrong.  

Authorities have acquired the tendency of taking advantage of this understanding to mislead people. It is this idea of morality that makes propaganda a very effective tool in leadership. The leaders and those in authority will pretend to have the interest of the people in their minds and in the real sense they are doing whatever is for their own good. They will always assert that whatever they are doing is in respect to the societys ethics and virtue. They have always exploited peoples fear for authority to gain, especially politically. On their part, the people follow the opinions of these leaders without questioning them because this is what the society expects of them.    

This view of morality has also helped in fueling stereotyping and prejudice. This is where the society has led people to believe that certain behaviors are morally right while others are not. People have been chained to stereotypes about morality that have led them not to think ethically about many issues that are prevalent in the society. Prejudice is also prevalent due to this negative understanding of morality. Any person who refuses to accept what the society considers morally right is easily discriminated against. Heshe will be viewed as a person with no morals.

This wrong understanding of morality has restricted people from thinking about the environment from an ethical perspective. In all the problems that affect the environment, people have been made to find solutions from what the society considers right or wrong.  

It is true to argue that in the societys understanding of morality, things like environmental conditions and problems are not included. Therefore where the society is allowed to define what is to be accepted as right or wrong, many aspects of environment are left out. No parent in the contemporary society will set as a rule that hisher child should take care of the environment. Many of us have grown up without knowing how our actions impact on the environment. Politicians on the other hand will always stand in defense of their political ambitions without thinking about the environment. Even in times when matters of environment are considered in the society, they are mentioned as any other business, not as a moral responsibility in the society. Influential people in the society have taken advantage of this understanding to destroy the environment. This people have established industries that pollute the environment without putting in place any measures to prevent this. People have no voice in the matter because they have the obligation of obeying the authority. Influential people have put governments in their power due to promises and financial favors, thus deteriorating the environment. Many industries set up contribute to destruction of the environment and the natural resources without any way of preventing them after all we are supposed to obey the government and the authorities in the society.    

There are people who are against this kind of understanding. These are the people who are viewed as social misfits. They are condemned by the society for attempting to view the environment from a different perspective. This can lead to more problems because these people will always rebel against their parents and the society in general. They view their parents and society as hypocrites who have refused to embrace and respect their own standards. This kind of person knows and understands that heshe is right where all the others are wrong. In this kind of situation, the societys understanding of morality restricts people from exploring and understanding the environment on their own. Seeking to find their own way by rebelling against the rigid society is what leads them to greater danger. They derive fun by doing those things that the society considers wrong. In situations where these people form a group, the problem is further aggravated. They act to prove a point to the society. They always want to act in their own way to exemplify certain set of virtues.  

This form of thinking about morality does not allow us to utilize the dictates of our conscience. After my parents and the society has dictated to me about what is right or wrong, what do I need my conscience for The society does not allow us to judge between what is right or wrong. This is where we find it difficult to deal with situations that our parents or leaders did not tell us about. Taking the example of the environment, as long as the authorities have not warned us against destroying it, we will continue doing it. If our conscience was allowed to operate, we would be able to judge by ourselves whether it is right or wrong. Under this point the idea of hypocrisy can be revisited. Our leaders and the society do not care about the environment. What we see on a daily basis is the environment being degraded under their watch. This is the reason why it will be hypocritical for them to tell us that it is wrong to destroy the environment. They will always shy away from telling us that it is wrong. As long as they have not told us that it is wrong, and we are only supposed to make decisions on what the society has said is wrong or right, we will continue performing the activities that lead to destruction of the environment.  

Society-based morality from this perspective is territorial. Territorial morality is not flexible. As long as it is not my parents of the powers in my society that have said, then I am not bound to follow. My obligation is only to follow the rules and regulations that my society has set as right or wrong. Nevertheless, there are rules that are coincidentally universal. These are the only rules that cut across territorial Bounderies and have many ways of learning. Others that do not and are society-bound are only applicable to that society. As long as the society does not open its members to various definitions of morality, it is not possible to benefit from those ethics and virtues that are universal. For example, if my society did not tell me that environmental pollution is wrong, even hearing it from a different community will make no difference. I only need to hear and follow what my society says.      

This argument does not rule out the benefit of this understanding. Whenever the rules and regulations set up to be followed by individuals or the society are right, then the advantage of this understanding is apparent. For example, children who follow this understanding and obey their parents directives, end up as upright children. There are individuals who choose not to pay attention to morality from this perspective and end up lost. They refuse to pay attention to what the society may think. These are the kind of children who become rebels and end up as delinquents in the society. But in this case, they cannot be said to be amoralists because they well know the difference between the wrong and the right. It is only that they have refused to go with the understanding that everyone has accepted. This shows the failure of society in allowing freedom of understanding to morality.      

Conclusion
If people were allowed greater freedom in the understanding of morality, they will think on diverse applications of morality they will be able to include the environment, which they will think about ethically. It is time parents, religions and societies allowed people to think about ethical matters far from what the society has set up. The parents, religions and societies have a duty to offer directions and guidelines and let people think and contribute to the environment.

Another way of saving the environment apart from opening our minds to different definitions of morality is for the society to change its thinking on the matter and include environmental ethics in their definition of morality.