Do
you hear that little voice within you when you do something bad?
Does everyone have an inner voice and does everyone's voice say the
same kinds of things? Are those voices taught or are they innate?
Of course, these questions relate to the existence and content of
consciences. When we hear of horrendous behavior and, when the
perpetrator is caught, we hear his or her justification for the
insidious act, we wonder how a person can believe in what he or she
is saying; how can that person possibly believe that what he or she
did is justified? The bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building
and the justification that Timothy McVeigh provided comes to mind. I
saw the interview; I believe he believed in what he was saying. How
does that happen? How can someone's moral compass be so out of whack
with what the vast majority of people agree is evil?
In
the last several postings, I have been sharing my view of what an
entity within a federated union is. First, entities are members of a
federation. An entity can be an individual or a group. A review of
the attributes of an entity is useful when one is looking at the
actions of a federation. By understanding what entities are gives
students a handle on one of the important elements that constitute a
federation. The last few postings of this blog described and
explained the importance of status. Each member of a federation has
status and that reflects either the power a member has or that
member's reputed power. Status affects how members interact.
A
second attribute of an entity is the entity's conscience. Conscience
refers to the ideal domain of an entity's thinking. I believe
thinking and feeling can be seen as constituting three different
domains: the domain of the real, the domain of the ideal, and the
domain of the physiological. The real is what we hold to be
objective truth. The ideal refers to what we believe should be. And
the physiological refers to what our chemical makeup either forces us
to do – as in the case of breathing, if not impeded – or
encourages us to do – as in engaging in sexual behavior. Some of
this encouraging can be quite strong and oftentimes influences us on
subconscious levels.
Be
that as it may, a conscience, in terms of federated commitments,
relates to how an entity believes and feels about the values and
norms of the federation in which the entity belongs. That is, it
relates to the entity's ideal domain. Of course, the union has an
interest in encouraging its members to have positive beliefs and
feelings toward those values and norms. A smartly run union will
expend resources to encourage those beliefs and feelings. I
emphasize the word “encourage” – as opposed to “enforce.”
For one thing, it is impossible to force anyone to believe in or feel
positively toward any set of values. But beyond that, any attempt to
force such beliefs or feelings in a society we generally describe as
a free society will most likely backfire and the “instructed”
member will probably look for ways to exit or undermine the union.
But
I stray from my purpose in this posting. Here, I want to address how
studying entities benefit by analyzing their consciences. Whether
the object of a study is to look at the general nature of federations
or how the members of a union behave, the student is well served by
looking at what motivates the members. Primary motivational force
for any actor – be it a person or group – is the sense an entity
has in what is moral or immoral. And while morality can have a
variety of foundational standards – from religious standards to
informal norms – which can lead us to a variety of expectations,
the moral expressions of a federation need to be included in any
analysis. Why? Because, as a unit capable of collective action, the
health of a federation and the manner in which it acts can be
described, explained, understood, and even predicted, to a great
extent, by how it defines and binds its membership. What is
generally seen as good or evil, to the extent the perception is
shared, provides a powerful insight into what binds the membership
and what motivates it to act. A student, therefore, should ask what
those values are and how strongly they are held by the membership
both individually and collectively.
A
simple illustration would be to look at the antebellum period of
American history. While the disagreement over the morality of
slavery is obvious, it is only one of the many value conflicts that
existed. The North was becoming an industrial giant and the South
wanted to maintain its plantation economy. This intensified a series
of antagonizing values and norms. Views on religion, gender issues,
etiquette standards, and the like became more pronounced. For
example, dueling was still in vogue in the South and almost passe in
the North. The nation had been drifting apart on many fronts and what
constituted the content inhabiting the consciences of the different
sections of the country became starkly distinguishable and
contradictory.
Contemporary
examples include nations such as Egypt. Looking at the period after
the uprisings of 2011, there seem to be profound moral conflicts
brewing which are pitting the more traditional Islamist believers
against more secular segments of the population. The issues
separating these interests are ones of conscience. The health of the
nation can be judged to be in peril because moral disagreements are
neither easily glossed over nor amenable to compromise. Hence, the
upcoming years for Egypt, whether one considers it a formal
federation or an informal one, will probably be highly challenging
and its prospects of establishing a stable political environment are
not at all guaranteed.
So,
where are the values of a federated union expressed? In a formal
federation, a collective is formed by its members agreeing to the
provisions of a covenant or a compact, and the values of the union
are stated in the bill of rights of that agreement. The terms of the
bill of rights consist of agreed upon values in the form of
individual negative rights – actions that the collective cannot
call on its members to perform or advantages to give up – positive
rights – actions the collective is committed to perform for the
benefit of the members – and/or actions that the federation or an
entity should or should not perform. In the history of our nation's
compact, the initial expression of values is contained in the
Declaration of Independence. By mostly condemning the king of
Great Britain for committing a list of atrocities, the Continental
Congress expressed the values this new nation was to uphold as being
sacred. If what the king “did” was immoral, it would be wrong or
immoral for an American government to do likewise. This list of
values was later superseded by the first ten amendments to our
Constitution – our formal Bill of Rights. To the
degree we all share in the imbedded values of these documents, they
have become part of the little voice that defines what is moral and
what is immoral – it becomes imbedded in our conscience.
Our
own current conditions point out one more aspect of how conscience
serves us by affecting how we define our values. As I was watching
the news tonight, there seems to be a slew of charges that, in the
name of fighting terrorism, our national government is being with
violating some of our collective values. It seems that the national
government has been monitoring our phone calls and emails. So far,
it hasn't been established that the government has been listening in
on our calls, but whom we call and who calls us has been recorded.
The same goes for emails which is even “worse” in that I believe
they are being subject to being read. This pits our values
concerning privacy against our values concerning security. And that
points out that any expression of values in the form of rights or
otherwise needs to be spelled out through experience because values
we hold can easily conflict and reality is complicated. Time and the
development of historical forces need to be experienced before we
know what we strongly value both in absolute terms and in terms of
their relative strength. It is our conscience that inhibits us from
allowing us to betray our values by rationalizing them away for what
is opportune in a given situation. As such, conscience is that
attribute in which an entity fights, in tempting situations, against
giving up who the entity is. By not abandoning what the entity
believes, he, she, or it establishes its true identity through those
values or principles making up the entity's conscience.
No comments:
Post a Comment