Universal Natural Truths – Explication

In my previous post I had written, “Within society, we are at all times in a constant flux of both paradigms. Of course, there are certain factors that solidify the grounds onto which paradigm may be enforced by the mind. The main factor of inhibition is that of the laws of society, or the laws of the individual mind. The laws of society and of the individual mind are not moral truths. They may try to enforce and exemplify individual moral truths, however are not moral truths. Moral truths by their very definition do not need enforcing, they come to us as universal natural truths.”

I believe that this paragraph needs to be explicated further.

Within society we have laws and these laws are based on the contingent decision of authoritative powers. Thus, the laws of society are a mix of laws pertaining to either the selfish life or the caring life, depending on the authoritative power.

However, moral truths are universal and natural. Such is to say that moral truths comes to us as natural and without thought. Furthermore, this truth is universal in all cases, much like Kant’s Categorical Imperative.

What I mean by “natural and without thought”, I mean that moral truths seem evident to ourselves. Of course you would not allow such a thing!

But the problem with society, is the very fact that it is a mixture of two paradigms. On one side, you have the paradigm of selfish lives who value the individual self and on the other side, you have the paradigm of the caring lives who value the relations between people.

In both cases, both have their own individual ideas of morality, and in both cases are universal within their respected paradigms. However, the problem is that society is set up as a mixture between the two paradigms. Thus, there is a clash within the laws of society and judgments are not made for the real reasons.

So how are we supposed to set up our laws?

As I said before, I believe that the “caring life” exhibits the qualities of a good life, and thus our laws should reflect that of the “caring life” and not of the “selfish life”. Why though?

By nature, the selfish life only pertains to the individual self. Laws on the other hand are made to remedy and resolve conflicts between two or more individuals within a society. Thus, the “caring life” which adheres to the relations between individuals in society, better fits the criteria in which laws should be based upon.

Thus, the universal moral truths within the “caring life” are what our laws should be based off of. Then it would be the case that our laws adhere to a universal moral truth, that being of the “caring life”.

Remember that the laws of society are not the moral truths? Well, if the moral truths become the laws of society, then by their very nature, would be moral truths. Therefore, the laws of society are moral truths in this manner and would reflect the actual sense of morality.

But one might argue, why can this not be the case for the “selfish life”? Well it could happen, the moral truths of the “selfish life” paradigm may become the laws of society, but what good would that do for society? For the individual relations within the scope of law? Nothing! Because the value for “selfish lives” pertains in their own individual welfare.” This would mean that the laws of society, would reflect the selfish behavior and actions of their paradigm. In the end, it would benefit the authority, and prey on the citizens. Thus, one must adhere to the “caring life” when pertaining to the laws of society.

The “caring life” then exhibits universal moral truths, that in turn reflect the morality of the laws within the society, and finally penetrate deep into the minds of the citizens. This then reciprocates when something happens and justice is upheld in the universal proper manner.

This is also portrayed by Kant, in his Categorical Imperative. He believed that by implementing the categorical imperative, it would in turn change the moral constitution of society, which would then be reflected upon in the laws of society.

Currently we live in a age of mixed paradigms, where some laws pertain to one and some the other. Thus, there is a clash in our justice system and we are not quite sure who exactly is right or wrong. However, if we are to reflect the moral capability that true laws have, then we must actively change the justice system to that which adheres to the paradigm of the “caring life”.

I hope I explicated this paragraph further without making it more convoluted.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s