Conflict, imposition, and morality

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 140522

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"There is no empirical evidence I know of for 
any deity's existence or for the tenets of any 
religion outside the humans who 
compiled/composed/received them."

Del replies:
If you're speaking of an empirical evidence 
"knowable" by everyone at once, you're right. 
However, if you're speaking of evidence 
"knowable" by one person, you're not that 
right anymore. The Holy Ghost, for example, 
can provide absolute personal evidence, but 
that evidence is not transferable.

Moreover, your comments bring up an interesting 
question: what is the empirical evidence in 
the Potterverse that Light is right and that 
Dark is wrong? What is the empirical evidence 
that DD is right and that LV is wrong? Apart 
from people's own convictions and desires, 
what is there to say that LV's view isn't just 
as right as DD's? In fact, we do know that quite 
a few people didn't use to think that Dark and 
LV were wrong. Sirius told us that his own 
parents, and several others, thought that LV 
had it right in his ideology. It seems like 
the true reason the WW as a group turned against 
LV is not so much a moral reason, but rather 
fear: they are scared of LV and what he's done. 
They turned against his methodology, but not 
so much against his ideology, as demonstrated 
by all the bigoted and racist attitudes still 
exhibited by a lot of wizards and witches. So 
technically LV is wrong to break the law and 
kill people, and that's why he's being so 
strongly opposed. But he's apparently not so 
wrong, by WW morality, to think as he does.

I, Del, wrote earlier:
"I would never adopt Snape's code even if I 
abandoned mine, simply because I know that 
Snape's code is a painful one."

Sandy aka msbeadsley replied:
"Are you saying that it pains Snape, or that 
it would pain you?"

Del answers:
Both :-) I know I would end up feeling lots of 
emotional pain if I decided to hold to grudges,
for example, and I am convinced that Snape 
similarly hurts himself by holding to his own 
grudges.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"But the law has its basis in codes that go 
back to God as well; so then, why is it 
necessary that "those who don't know God" 
respect the law?"

Del replies:
Because the majority wants them to, and 
provided punishments for those who would do 
otherwise. I didn't mean respect as in 
"support, or uphold", but more as in "fear, 
or go along with". 

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"There is no obligation for anyone to even 
respect the majority's morality, IMO. There 
are only various consequences if they don't."

Del replies:
That's what I meant :-) Respect doesn't 
necessarily come out of moral agreement, it 
can simply be a self-preservation attitude. 
As in "respecting" Umbridge and her educational 
decrees, for example: people complied with 
them, at least on the surface, not because 
they agreed with them, but simply to stay out 
of troubles.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"An obligation only exists if the person in 
question adopts the majority's morality, even 
if they only do so in the sense of trying to 
use them to modify *others'* behavior. Once 
they buy in, they're stuck. IMO."

Del replies:
Not sure what you mean here, sorry.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"Snape is furious, AFAWK, when Harry invades 
his privacy (memories in the Pensieve). 
Privacy is part of a moral/social code outside 
of law. Snape insists on other respectful 
forms as well; IMO, once he demands that 
others adhere to a code of moral/social 
conduct, he obligates himself as well. It is 
one thing to refuse to adhere to a code if 
the reason is that you do not recognize it as 
correct or relevant or useful; once you do, 
if you ignore it at only at your own 
convenience, then, IMO, you are morally in 
error. Inherently. Regardless of the code in 
question."

Del replies:
You're making a slight mistake, though: 
respect of the privacy and the person of 
superiors are not components of only one 
moral code. They are integral parts of many 
other moral codes that *do not* include 
reciprocity to inferiors. In fact, they are 
even part of LV's "moral code": he, as the 
Lord, has the right to humiliate his 
subordinates, torture them, invade their 
privacy, and so on, but they don't have the 
right to reciprocate, and they must always 
show him respect. This is exactly how Snape 
is acting towards LV: he always calls him 
"the Dark Lord", for example, not 
"You-Know-Who". He also tended to do that 
with DD, shutting up when DD told him to, for 
example, and always calling him in respectful 
terms. So the facts that Snape reserves the 
right to invade his students' privacy and to 
disrespect them while at the same time 
demanding that they respect his own privacy 
and person are not at all incompatible. They 
just show that Snape doesn't go with the 
reciprocating-to-inferiors moral code, and 
there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
""The One Right Moral Code" changes from 
country to country and believer to believer. 
There is no absolute code, "

Del replies:
Exactly! What constitutes the One Right Moral 
Code is particular to each person, and this 
is why it cannot be used to judge others, and 
it cannot be morally imposed on anyone else. 
Which is precisely why I find it unfair to try 
and force a particular brand of morality on 
Snape.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"Personally, I recognize no deity; on the 
other hand, the idea of life under no code or 
law strikes me as terrifying and appalling. I 
want to live in a world where people balance 
their own wants and needs against the wants 
and needs of others. I consider it a kind of 
social barter system; I believe people grant 
each other rights because they want to have 
some themselves, and, essentially, there is 
constant and infinite bargaining going on."

Del replies:
That's the difference with LV: he doesn't 
care about bargaining, because he has enough 
*power* to actually impose his desires. And 
unlike us, he's not at all afraid of living 
in a lawless land, because he knows he's 
powerful enough to survive it and even take 
it over. Those are things he learned very 
early in life: that he has the power to make 
others do his will, and his "morality" is 
directly derived from this knowledge. (I'm 
saying " "morality" " when referring to LV's 
code, because I think he's a sociopath, which 
means that he doesn't actually have a morality.)

As for Snape, we know that he always had poor 
social skills, and that he never knew how or 
bothered to do the social bargaining thing. 
What he wants is respect from those "lower" 
than him or on the same level as him, and he's 
apparently ready to suck up to those higher 
than him to obtain that. So LV's offer is 
much more tempting for him than, say, DD's. 
And I don't see that there's anything 
inherently wrong with that either.

Sandy aka msbeadsley wrote:
"I think the need for religion will eventually 
go the path of the appendix, if the race 
survives long enough. I'd like to see Homo 
Sapiens grow up enough to no longer need 
celestial mommies and daddies. I want to 
believe in people, and have people believe in 
themselves and each other."

Del replies:
And I believe that Christ will return to the 
Earth, forever this time, and rule it as King 
of Kings. To each her own ;-)

JMO, of course,

Del