Your Moral Earth's Magnetic Field

I've heard people talk about how important their moral compass is to them.  What this means can be something different to any different person, but one definition that I think matches most people's conception is, "a natural feeling that makes people know what is right and wrong and how they should behave."  Are the natural feelings we have really what should make us know what's right and wrong?

Doing what's natural may not be a terrible basis for morality, but it's not a good one either.  We have a number of pack animal and cooperative instincts that guide us toward some caring and concern for our fellow man (and remember man is gender neutral in this context).  These also create an aversion toward malice in many contexts, which is also good.  Our instincts don't stop with these, 'love your neighbor' drives though.

Being a pack animal leads to a set of instincts, and while some of those are positive like what's stated above others are decidedly negative.  It leads to a tribalism, probably due to competition with other packs.  We protect our own, but those who aren't are own are usually fair targets for whatever we can dish out.  This is why looking at history we only seem to have been fighting against racism, sexism, or similar discrimination for about a century or two, and to some even that's being quite generous.  There's also significant drives to personal status and individual gain.  We want the pack to be strong, but we also want to be the head of the pack (or at least be very secure about our position in it) and there's a good chance we're willing to trade the good of our group for a high position in it, too.  This is why children throw tantrums, politicians and important businessman are as willing to admit mistakes as they are to part with teeth, and people gossip about the shortcomings of acquaintances.

This leads me back to the idea of a moral compass.  Truthfully, I think it's a good analogy as long as we remember one thing: a compass doesn't operate in a vacuum.  A compass is a magnetized needle set on a spindle (or sometimes in other ways, such as suspended in a liquid).  It points to the north because it aligns itself with the Earth's magnetic field.  In morality, this leads to the question that might be much more important than how is your moral compass, but what is your moral Earth's magnetic field.

What things external to ourselves help us understand what is moral and what is not?  Is it divine scripture?  Public opinion and associated feelings of dignity or shame?  Articulate and interesting discussions on ethics?  All of these have flaws which must be examined and guarded against and all have certain merits as well.  Compasses can be disrupted by anything that produces strong magnetic fields, like high electrical current.  Precise navigation may also require an adjustment between magnetic north and 'true north' since the Earth's magnetic poles aren't perfectly aligned with her north and south poles.  Just like a compass will not point true in a lightning storm or around power lines we should learn where our moral compass may fail to point us true and why if we want to stay true to our moral north wherever we go.

"Why is there always money for war, but not education?"

I see a bumper sticker with the above almost everyday on my walk to school. I can feel myself sympathetic with the sentiment sometimes. I often feel that the sentiment is naive, that of a simpleton, and masquerading as something with important meaning while truly hollow, on the other hand. Thinking about it I've (obviously) decided to write a post on the subject, and actually I came up with an answer:
Because war is expensive, education isn't. Even as a college student who is continually hit with the cost of education-a physics major who often thinks, "Man, I wish the phys. dept. could just replace all this lab equipment with newer, nicer stuff," a student who knows how expensive books are, a student who works extensively with computers and wonders if he'd do well at all without his personal computer-I think the need for money in education is overrated. Good education requires more personal involvement on the part of the teacher and the student. That's the most important factor. Everything else is gravy. Shouldn't we have a financial investment and incentive for teachers do be involved then? Yes. Yes, yes, yes. I'd love it if teachers got paid more, because apart from parents they may have the most important job for society.
Then again, soldiers may have the most important job for society. Soldiers bought us freedom from England with blood, nuclear warheads scared us, but may have also saved us from communists during the cold war, and soldiers, TSA, CIA, NSA, and others from the American war machine that seems to have too much money keep those who would kill us all simply because we don't bow to their beliefs. Moreover, soldiers liberates Auschwitz, and have stopped evil time and time again throughout history.
Guns, planes, bombs, and armour cost money though. Keeping these relevant costs more. Finding a good teacher takes, well frankly luck. Actually, it costs character. If our society doesn't cultivate character, no one is going to take a job trying to impart knowledge to others. This number will fall even farther if the students of our society don't have enough humility (which people of good character should have) to learn, instead persecuting those that would dare try to tell them they need to work harder to understand an unknown piece of the world. No one can do more to bring the character to the students of our society than parents. But most parents worry more about their children being smart, successful, or simply docile than they do about having character.
In a perfect world, we would pay teachers would be millionaires, and armies wouldn't exist because there'd be no need. Aside from religious beliefs, we'll never live in that perfect world and we have to live intelligently, according to what really exists and addressing those needs, in the real world. The real world has evil, danger, and societal problems that make education hard, so sometimes it's easier to pretend we live in a perfect world.

Not excusable, but understandable

I have been thinking since for a little bit now on the title of this post. I suppose I should say that my thoughts about it might just barely crystallize here as I write them, or maybe not. It's an interesting thing to think about, and has meaning and importance, and it's about time for the monthly post here on my blog so here goes.

I think my idea here is what drives reformation. What drives one to become better? To leave bad habits and grow to be better. This is similar to my previous post on the idea of a PGF. My question here though focuses more on bad habits, or vices. I've been struggling with some of my own lately. Perhaps it may be better to say that a particular struggle has been highlighted recently, as I hope to be continually struggling with my vices and weakness always. Getting to the point, I see the poor decisions I make and I decide that they're not excusable, but sometimes understandable.

This means I seek to understand what drives me to do what my better judgment tells me not to. I look for the conditions and the reasons behind bad decisions, internal and external. I usually find them. I usually find a good explanation for why I don't do what I think I should. Knowing this empowers me to be better, to avoid those pitfalls in the future, and to build situations around and within me that will propel me to good rather than away from it.

Knowing what caused my iniquities, though, doesn't mean that they don't exist. It doesn't mean, to use my hated phrase, "I'm a good person." On the other hand, weeping and feeling sorrow for what I've done wrong won't help either. I can't live in the past, wishing I hadn't done what I've done. I can only accept my previous faults, and strive to make sure they do not become present faults.

Do you really want justice?

I've been thinking recently about a comic book that I'd like to write or something. I'm not a comic book writer and don't really have any connections so I probably won't, but that's not the point. The point is that I've got a cool concept, which I hereby submit to you for comment!
The idea is that a man after learning of horrible evils perpetrated be someone (I've been thinking date rape by some frat boy) wishes to set it straight but can't. He prays for the power to fulfill justice. An angel (though physically and visually just a guy), truth, appears and tells him that there's a slot open for angel of justice and that because of his prayer he'll get to take the position. The really interesting part then starts.
Truth tells this guy that he doesn't want to be justice. I've decided he'd say something along these lines, "To be a force so indiscriminate and powerful, a force so immovable and implacable that God sent His beloved son to suffer and die on earth in order to save the rest of His children from it, do you really think you can want to deal with such an overwhelming strength?"
Well, because it's a comic book he'd say yes, and then be turned into a an fiery, angelic, and vicious engine of punishment. I envision this angel inflicting horrible torture and suffering on those who've done wrong. The man when he comes to (that is to say when the spirit of justice withdraws from him) is horrified by what he's done, what he's become. Throughout the comic he tries to stop it, hold the spirit back, but never can because the burning wrath of justice will always fall upon the wicked!
Anyway, I write this not to say, "hey, wouldn't I make a good comic writer? Isn't this a cool idea?" (though your thoughts as per that subject are welcome) but rather to ask, "What is justice?" My idea for this comic isn't just a cool idea for a cool story, I see justice as an overpowering and indiscriminate force. I think if justice were to have an earthly incarnation it would go around dispensing horrific punishment to those who commit horrific crimes. In the end, her scales when weighted to one side with abominations and evils will demand of Lady Justice to bring down her sword on the other with the same force, won't they?
I see mercy, personally through Christ's atonement, as the only force to offset justice. Do people force mercy into their conceptions of justice? I wonder if this is tied to the decline of religious belief, as Deity can dispense perfect justice but man can't. Perhaps man, without deity's guidance redefines justice for himself so as to seek it in a humane way?
I certainly believe that justice and mercy must work together. A human justice system must allow for mercy to a much greater degree than what one's conception of pure justice may be. Perhaps, though, this is the core of super-heroes. We want to believe in justice, we want to believe that those who do wrong will be punished by a force beyond our mortal abilities (as individuals and a society). The religious have a real belief in such a power in their God, if they envision Him as just. What about the secular? I really don't know, if you read this and do, please leave a comment.

What's the derivative of your PGF?

"They're a good person." This phrase drives me insane. Have you ever heard it used to actually describe someone that does good? Maybe, but much more often it's used to justify a lack of good, to overlook someone's vices. How often do you hear something like, "He may cheat on his girlfriends once in a while, but he's a good person." or "She may stew in envy and bitterness toward her sister, but she's a good person." I propose that this phrase is a deeply flawed and destructive one.
I think the inherent drawback of this phrase is that it is binary. What one is really trying to say, generally, is that so-and-so is not a bad person. The underlying assumption is that people are either good or bad. It's the reinforcement of this idea that may be the most destructive part of this phrase. Good and bad are like and hot and cold. Water may be cold, but not cold enough to drink. Water may be hot, but not hot enough to shower in. We need to stop thinking of this, and many things, as having a dividing line, but rather as a spectrum. Goodness is closeness to perfection, while badness is farther away, or closer to pure wickedness and evil.
All that said, let's cast this in some of the precise terms that I really understand. Let's say that good and evil are like a number line, there's infinity on one side (infinite goodness) and infinity on the other (infinite evil). The number picked on this line defines how good a person you are. Don't take this opportunity to say that anyone with a goodness value below x (typically zero-using negative values to denote evil and positive values to denote goodness), because this is arbitrary. More importantly, let's say that someone's goodness value is defined at any point in time by some function, which I'd like to call one's personal goodness function-or PGF. I think that likely the most important aspect of a person is not the instantaneous value of the PGF, but rather the derivative (or rate of change for you non-mathematicians out there). One who is improving by leaps and bounds, growing, learning to do good and ceasing to do evil I declare is much more worthy of praise than one who may do a great deal of good but is slowly letting wickedness, darkness, hatred, and whatever else you wish to use to describe evil fester in his/her heart and turn him/her into a force for darkness.
The derivative of the PGF also tells us with what zeal one is improving oneself. If someone is slowly growing and becoming better, good for them. If one has such a commitment to overcoming vices and developing virtues that every second seems to teach them how better to perfect themselves, so much the better.
It is by being content with ourselves that we fall into bad habits. It is by letting little flaws live peacefully within us that we learn to ignore the good things we could be doing. Only be commitment to improving, perfecting ourselves can we learn to do all that we need to for the world's problems of greed, hatred, lust, and pride to be overcome. One way we can do this is to constantly ask yourself, "What's the derivative of your PGF?"