The nature and functions of morality

Many people react badly to the very idea of morality. It seems too closely associated with religion, and guilt seems to be the god that it is most interested in serving. Morality seems to be mostly about obeying the rules promulgated by parents or other authorities, no matter how pointless or stupid they may be. The very language of morality seems absolutist and dogmatic. At best it has the mustiness of an old attic; at worst, it is dangerous.

Having grown up in a Lutheran boarding school, I have a great deal of sympathy for this reaction. Indeed, the dangers posed by the language of morality are becoming more apparent every day. Too many political leaders see the world in terms of absolute good and evil, and identify these with their own religious beliefs. They exploit people's fears and prejudices with categorical assertions of “our” virtue and simplistic denunciations of “their” venality. Shabby moralizers seek power and domination through fiery condemnations of those whose sexual practices are different from theirs, or have different views about when life begins, or what it means to die with dignity.

In my opinion, the best way to remedy this appropriation of morality is not to give the language away to its abusers, but to go back to the source and examine the concepts and institutions of morality from the ground up.