The Ugly Truths

?

8/27/07

The Question: My question to you is: Is it truly possible to be logical and moral at the same time? Before doing a little research of my own, I considered logic and morality to be somewhat separate. In my opinion, logic is about what makes sense, and morality is about right and wrong. But after looking up the definitions, I found the two to be somewhat synonymous. LOGIC- 1.the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference. 2.reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions. MORALITY-conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. But is morality really based on logic? Everything that is moral is not necessarily logical. For example, It’s logical to kill 1 person to save the lives of 5 others, but it isn’t moral to kill anyone. So are these two aspects of life really synonymous, or are they used at different times based on the situation? When do you decide to use one vs. the other?– Raven, 20: College Park, MD

?

My Answer:

Okay, now we?re cooking with the questions! A little wordy, maybe?but all in all, a very good question nonetheless. Let me start by throwing an extra term in there: reasoning. I?m only adding this one because it is necessary to explain myself. With that said, let?s get started with Logic.

As you mention, part of logic is a science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference. Also, it?s a system/mode/method of reasoning. While there are other definitions of this, they are either re-wording the same two previous statements or refer to technology and/or math. In the first part of the definition, the claim is made that there has to be correct or reliable inference. The inference is primarily based on an agreed set of rules/standards or a premise (i.e. ? a statement accepted as true or a basis to go along with, whereby all other reasoning continues to accept this as ?right?). For the second part, logic is a system/model/method of reasoning. Translation: it?s a put-together set of standards of forming conclusions, judgments, or inferences from facts or premises. Are you with me so far?

Keeping that first part in your head, let?s address morality. Once again, you?re correct with that part of the definition: conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. If we use this definition alone, however, we have a bit of a case of circular defining. One: we?re using ?moral? to define morality; two, virtuous is the same term, almost; and, three, ‘right conduct’ is vague. So, let?s get to the bottom of what ?moral? means. In many of the definitions the expression ?right conduct? keeps popping up. Who determines that anyway? Digging deeper, we get a definition of the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character, and that it refers to generally accepted customs of conduct and right living in a society, and to the individual’s practice in relation to these. So, then, right conduct is really what people have found to be considered ?good? or ‘bad’, whether because of conscience response or other means.

Now, reread these previous two paragraphs and proceed to the next one.

Going back to logic, we see that, ultimately, logic is based upon a set of accepted or reasoned statements and premises. In other words, there wasn?t a ?natural? book of truths ever here, rather a system devised from which all other things would be determined. Similarly, with morality we see that morality is also human-defined wherein what could be moral today can be deemed immoral some time after. Moral is self and society defined. Once again, just like with logic, there was never a ?natural? collection of what was considered moral, only what people thought themselves.

Pheww!!! We needed all this just to begin to answer your question. The first question you pose to me is, ?Is it truly possible to be logical and moral at the same time?? The short answer is, of course. The long way of answering is to first ask a question. The question is, ?Is it truly possible to be in a state of following a system of reasoning where the conclusion or judgment is based on facts/premises, and in a state of following generally accepted customs of conduct and right living in a society?? Quite a mouthful, but that?s essentially what you?re asking. So, here?s the case that show it?s possible: Tom works at the local Best Buy. The manager watches him sell 5 laptops and that?s the only action he performed, with each laptop costing $800. Logic: There should be the $4,000 in the register plus any starting money in the register that the manager administered. The manager counts out the drawer and finds only $1600. Morality: Based on what?s accepted/expected of employer/employee relationship, the manager has every right to fire Tom after finding no viable excuse for the money being missing. There you have it, a possibility of being logical and moral at the same time. Let?s say, however, that you don?t want to go with the definition of morals being society based and that you use your own system. If the rules you use to define your system of morals have been followed and you used logic along the way, you have a similar case.

The question that might be more effective is, ?Can you always be moral and logical at the same time?? The answer for this, unfortunately, depends on each individual?s lifestyle and to whom or what they answer to for their morals. I must say, especially for religion, logical often crosses the line of moral. With your own example of the lives of people, some would see it as being two different things while others would see them as one in the same. It isn?t moral to you to kill anyone but that?s not everyone?s position. Most people make the mistake of thinking because they feel strongly about something that it is the ultimate, undeniable truth of the world and that?s not true. There have been those who?ve engaged in genocide based on how strongly they?ve felt about something. Never assume that because it seems right morally, to you, that it is the case. Some would say it?s logical to kill one person to save five others but that you wouldn?t be completing your moral duty by letting one live knowing that you could save five with the act of killing that one. That term, moral duty, gives the ?go ahead? for a lot of what some would consider murderous and inhumane acts.

On to the second question you asked, ?Is morality really based on logic?? There is a reason that I sought to point out that logic and morality was person-defined. While logic is supposed to be based on irrefutable data and concepts, it has never really been 100% concrete on matters of opinion. What has it been based on, by my opinion? The maximum output of reason, ?good? (however, since ‘good’ is relative, it really translates here as what?s wanted), benefits, and evidence to the main premise while having as little of capricious nature, backlash, negativity (once again, this meaning what?s not wanted), and minimum of facts or evidence. Translation: Logic is all of what?s wanted and easy to defend and prove based on your own ?truth?. The same for morality: What is moral, changes with time, location, philosophy, beliefs, experiences, benefit, etc. In other words, each person or society can have ?moral? that contradict another?s definition of it. So, is morality based on logic? I think it depends on the person. If material drives a person, they may stick more to what?s logical of getting them what they want. Conversely, it a person strives to live a spiritual life, they may always let their conscience or obligations to a set of beliefs decide their action. Notice, though, that in either of these cases what they choose to do can still be immoral or moral, according to you. That?s where the problem comes in with morals; it?s up to you. Understand that as their definition of moral changes, so does their definition of logic.

For people in set standards of religion, beliefs, etc., it?s completely logical for them to follow the set of rules of that setup. In their eyes, they?re morality is based on logic?And there logic is based on morality. The set of rules that govern you is what determines how logical logic is and how moral morality is.

So on to your third question, ?Are the two terms synonymous?? Can you figure out the answer based on what I just said? For some people, the answer is ?yes? and for others it is ?no?. Understand that something isn?t moral or logical to you until you decide that it is so. That?s why there are all these different beliefs, spiritual movements, ideas, creativities, so on and so forth. You might say that our different way of thinking is what drives and progresses us. Don?t tell me that you didn?t see that one coming. If we all followed or believed in the same logic and morals we might not have progressed at all or very slowly at the least.

When do you decide to use one versus the other? It?s up to you but you better believe that the way you tip the scales of moral vs. logical will depend on what will give you the maximum output of life or situation. And that?s what this whole thing sums up to. Logical and Moral are only tools of what the user ultimately wants or, in the case of logic, what the user sees the easiest. It?s all to make life acceptable and desirable by us, which is why it changes ever so often. Logic is generally harder to rebuttal, not because it?s ultimately true, but because it follows from an already accepted statement. Tell me, if I made up a world in my imagination and then set that as my premise, wouldn?t I be able to change the rules at will according to my own reasoning? The only rules I have to follow are my own rules given at the time of the premise. So if I?ve defined none or a limited version, wouldn?t that give me an absurd range to work with whereby you could never dispute me based on my design?

So is it possible to logical and moral at the same time? Yes. Is morality based on logic? For most people I think yes. After all, if it?s right to you it may be logical to you, even though you aren?t necessarily following the guidelines of logic. Is it really though? It depends on person and/or society. Logic follows from what has already been accepted and deemed true (doesn?t mean that it is) Moral should be what you feel or what society feels about an issue. However, they can overlap and are often the two resources pulled on to make the decision on laws. Are they synonymous? No, but since for some the terms can be based on each other, they might just be. Who is to tell them that they are wrong? They are ?user-based?’ terms and as such can be used however one decides to use them. There?s no innate set of laws along which every human thinks. You most likely will decide which one to use based on what you want, either at the time or in life.

Congratulations, you?ve actually reached the end of this long response!!! Now, if you hated reading all of this, don?t post a long question. However, if you enjoyed this long drawn out response feel free to be the next one who does this to my inbox. Bye!!!