How can we speak of morality if it is founded on empathy—on the shared experience of another’s suffering—when so many people are entirely devoid of this sense? It is as if they are deaf to it, in the same way some are blind to thinking and planning with perspective.
From afar, it benefits all of us to, if not love each other, at least stay respectful and neutral, and to find ways to cooperate. Yet there are those who refuse to see this, who have no desire to notice, and who barge ahead with their own truths, glued to “feels good” polarization; as many human being inevitably do just because it’s the easiest way.
But what kind of morality should we seek—one that does not rely on empathy, which many lack; and that does not depend on foresight, which many cannot perceive; yet also avoids the cult of strength, which leads only to self-destruction?
Isn’t morality, if seen from such a perspective, mostly an illusion of simply being good, an ideological abstraction?
One cannot feel the base of morality without power and laws backing it, because bad people will inevitably appear and try to exploit the good. “Do not expect pure morals, but rather expect balanced cooperation”
It is in the nature of any person to think about themselves first, so whatever motivates morality is ultimately an ideological thing, layered with many other influences in real life.
Leave a Reply