Morality in action

[Knife]

So, I posit; a lot of people on this board have subscribed to a sense of humanist ethics. I hear by challenge those close held beliefs. As I understand it, humanism is; appealing to the benifit of all so that if all are good, you are too.

I've hardly kept secret my change from hard core military to blue collar worker to my early mid life crisis to be a nurse. Along the way, I put forth various episodes to my proposed morality and my actions;

I've seen people die. Take that for what you wish. I've seen what happens to a body when dead, after short term and long term. Not all of them strangers.

That said, I've seen just as much nasty in blue collar work. In a warehouse working heavy equipment I've seen people mess up and miss appendages.

The meat and potatoes part of this is, simply this; recently partaking in the supposed health care of this country I've encountered a couple specific instances that define my position;

1)I was at a local store some months back. Getting back into my car after buying some insignificant groceries, I noticed a group of people slowly making their way to my car. Well perhaps not to my car but my direction. Some, after looking at them, were the stores employees but at least four were not.

One was leaning heavily on the cart with two store employee's helping. I got out of my car and intercepted them. A rather young (twenty something) was staggaring toward her car with...husband? relative in tow. Store employees were assiting her.

I asked if I could help and the 'significant other replied no, he was taking her home. Store folk got her to the car and I psuedo helped get her in while taking a quick set of vitals. It wasn't good but I told the guy as much. My guess she was in some sort of shock. From what, I have no idea.

The guy said he knew and she'd just come from a doctor. I told him she needed to go back and to that he just hmm 'ed and haww'ed. End of story, in front of me and various other people to include the stores employee's, they drove away. I have no idea if he drove her back to the doctor or what.

Not two weeks ago, I was about one minute late to an accident. Three cars to be exact. I still pulled over and checked it out. Some other guy pulled over and was 'running the show' as it were. This is what happens in such situations so I played second fiddle. Anyway, a mother a her two or three month old were actually well. It took me some effort to convince them to sit and relax instead of wander around the site. The second car wasn't that bad either, though the last car with an older lady was...not good. Good old boy was already on the phone with the cops when I drove up, so a quick assessment later she was just waiting for the parameds to show up.

When the parameds and fire department showed up, I left. Not much to do and all.

In my current job, I've been there as the last breath of life drained from a human being. Some I've reacted to by calling for help, others by doing procedures and by that it could be good things or bad.

I guess the question is; all those who do the humanist thing; what have you experienced to either push you down the road and/or is it all just ideology?

[The Grim Squeaker]

What do you mean by the humanist thing? Helping dying/injured people? helping people?
I'm unsure what you're asking people, is it simply aimed at people working in the field of medicine/aid?

[Darth Wong]

So, I posit; a lot of people on this board have subscribed to a sense of humanist ethics. I hear by challenge those close held beliefs. As I understand it, humanism is; appealing to the benifit of all so that if all are good, you are too.

That's not humanism. Humanism is the doctrine of upholding the value of human beings. For ethics purposes, it primarily involves the definition of human rights and the belief that humans intrinsically have such rights merely by existing and being human.

What you are thinking of is universalism, not humanism. Universalist ethics hold that if an action would be right for society in general, then it should also be right for you. Or to put it another way, it is the name given to the class of ethical arguments which begins by saying "if everyone did that ..."

As for what "pushes" someone into universalist ethics, I would tend to think that it's the recognition that society would be better off if we all adopted this idea. Certainly, the "looking out for number one" philosophy espoused by Ayn Rand has caused nothing but trouble.

[Rye]

My ethics aren't humanist because I admit I care more about my pets than I do about people I don't know. I don't think I'd be able to kill my cat or dog to feed a starving person in Africa, say. That said, I've helped people in the past, like a homeless guy that just keeled over near Manchester train station that other people walked past. I generally do things representative of what I'd hope other people would do. My ethics are mostly utilitarian, but I do care more about my friends and family than the rest of society, and I think that's something most people feel as a result of our genes and conditioned familiarity.

[B5B7]

I guess the question is; all those who do the humanist thing; what have you experienced to either push you down the road and/or is it all just ideology?

That's a pretty insulting question. I doubt that there is anyone so insulated from nasty aspects of life that they haven't had a personal experience where they were able to help and did help someone else [there may be some who wouldn't help, but obviously they are not humanist in either an ideological or practical sense].

[Darth Wong]

Should we not draw a distinction between the ethics we believe in and our actual conduct?

For example, almost everyone agrees that it is unethical to lie. And yet, almost everyone still lies on occasion (some more than others). Does this mean we don't think it's unethical to lie, or that we are guilty of failing to live up to our own ethical beliefs?

[B5B7]

Should we not draw a distinction between the ethics we believe in and our actual conduct?

That is definitely a valid point. An obvious example is what Christians claim they believe and what they actually do.

For example, almost everyone agrees that it is unethical to lie.

This is true as a general statement, but most people would also admit that can make exceptions - "white lies", etc.

And yet, almost everyone still lies on occasion (some more than others). Does this mean we don't think it's unethical to lie, or that we are guilty of failing to live up to our own ethical beliefs?

I would say that it is impossible to live in our society and not lie. White lies again.

My main problem with Knife's statement was it's absolutism "is it ALL just ideology".

[inasilentway]

Should we not draw a distinction between the ethics we believe in and our actual conduct?

For example, almost everyone agrees that it is unethical to lie. And yet, almost everyone still lies on occasion (some more than others). Does this mean we don't think it's unethical to lie, or that we are guilty of failing to live up to our own ethical beliefs?

I actually lean towards the former, it isn't always unethical to lie. I think most of us hold a tacit belief in consequentialism. Lying can be good or depending on the consequences it produces. Telling your son that his hamster ran away (when it was actually eaten by the family dog) is not the same as telling the friend you're giving a ride to that you're sober (when you are actually pissed.)

[Alyrium Denryle]

I dont even think it goes so far as a tacit belief in consequentialism. It is just evolution in action.

During cultural evolution, the social environment becomes a selective pressure just like the forests and savannas. If a brain fully accepts a maladative meme, the person possessing that brain will be selected out of the system. The brain will thus evolve to be able to discriminate between adaptive and maladaptive memes. In addition, an individual who can use the social behavior of others to their advantage will be favored by selection. This leads to an evolutionary arms race, where swindling mechanisms and anti-swindling mechanisms are in a constant struggle to one-up eachother, within the same population.

Morality is one of these anti-swindling mechanisms. You use morality as cognitive and social justification for either cooperating with another, or punishing them. So, you are set up to internalize and apply ethical systems and the like, provided they fit certain parameters (these are the so-called cultural universals, with some wiggle room for local adaptation and optimization in a given social environment, which I can go in to if you like...). However that is only one side of the coin.

The other side are the swindling mechanisms. In this case, you are set up to do two things:Rationalize decisions which are contrary to your internalized ethics, and not get caught doing so. You are optimized to be able to subconsciously assess when it is in your best interests to be "immoral", and act accordingly. When I say optimized I mean this in an evolutionary sense. An individual cannot be too rigid in their morals or they may miss opportunities that come along to increase their fitness, and thus they will be selected out. At the same time they cannot be too flexible or they will surely get caught.

What this ends up selecting for in the end are people who are very good at manipulating others, so they dont get caught breaking social rules. Now imagine how this system might relate to things like rape, infidelity, and child/spouse abuse. Hell, think about how it applies to everything from stealing to lies.

The point being, we believe these things (most of us anyway....) we really do. Until it is evolutionarily inconvenient. In situations where that is the case our brains are set up to rationalize the decision, and later on conveniently overlook our own hypocrisy.

[Alyrium Denryle]

To more directly answer the OP

I guess the question is; all those who do the humanist thing; what have you experienced to either push you down the road and/or is it all just ideology?

Honestly, I feel more for "lower" vertebrates than I do most people. It is my interactions with a few people to whom I am fairly close, and certain notable figures that keep me from going over the brink into misanthropy. Most people are stupid, short sighted morons, and two people on average do not have nearly as much sense between them as you can find in a frog or turtle. There are a rare few though in my experience that make the whole edifice of humans and human civilization something more than an unfortunate wash.

I look at these few as representing the unrealized potential of humanity which needs to be nurtured and cherished for what it is. The only known intelligent life in the universe.