Ann wrote:
How do we know what is right or wrong? I'm convinced that most of our beliefs and most of our conscience is really our anticipation of what other people would say about our actions, if they knew about them. What is right or wrong, then, becomes simply a question of what others think. Particularly, it becomes a question of what the most important authorities in our lives think.
Ann also wrote:
In my opinion, if Superman has killed, the real questions will have to be about morality, not about legality.
These two statements cannot be reconciled logically. If what is right and wrong (which is, after all, the basis of the meaning of 'morality') is determined by a community preference, then there is no way to determine what is right and what is wrong without holding an election every time such a question comes up. And if you know recent history, then you'll know that such a process won't work in the long run.
For example, the Jim Crow laws in the American South during the early and middle 20th century held black people down and limited their freedoms, yet they were passed by and supported by the majority of voting citizens. Does that make them right? If a majority of the people in a society decide that capital punishment is an acceptable option, does that end all reasonable debate on the subject? If a community decides that a man who cheats on his wife should be congratulated but a woman who cheats on her husband should die, is this right?
My response to each of these questions would be a resounding 'no.' The actions of any society must be judged by a common standard, which is what 'morality' is. Do we all agree on what is and what is not moral? No, but if we use the term, we must apply it properly.
Morality isn't something that's subject to personal preference or community standards. Ethics are flexible and change with the times and according to the situation. Morality is an absolute. And it is an absolute because it does not originate from those under its code but from outside those under its code.
We can't assume a moral position that on the one hand Superman doesn't ever kill, and on the other hand declare that right and wrong are determined by community consensus. If that were the case, then we could hold a vote and declare either Tank's postition or my own to be invalid and kick one of us out of the community.
I don't want that. But I also abhor sloppy thinking. Ann, you are usually very clear and orderly in the presentation of your position, but this time you've stumbled. I'm posting this because I consider you to be an intelligent and thoughtful person, and because I think highly of your positions. You defend your viewpoints reasonably and with restraint, and I have yet to see you personally insult anyone. I thank you for that.
And I don't want to insult anyone either. I only want to point out this inconsistency, one which seems to infect a number of people today in seemingly all walks of life. The application to this discussion is this: if it's wrong for Superman to kill under any circumstances, then it's always wrong to write about it. And I'm convinced that's
not what the FOLCs in this feedback thread are saying.
Thank you all for your clear-headed and reasonable discussion of this issue. And I will also tell you now that this discussion has caused me to make some changes to the last chapter of this epic. I hope they are well-received.
