The Changing Moral Landscape

[Occams Barber]

I'll take it! And in the interim the sermon is finished. Maybe I can finish work before midnight tonight...

Great. I bet the congregation is counting down the hours to your delivery.

I ducked off for an hour or so to cook and eat dinner (eye fillet, steamed new potatoes and coleslaw with strawberries and chocolate mousse for dessert -all washed down with half a bottle of cab/sav. I wonder what the poor people are eating? )

I hope you have also taken a break to eat, to bid goodnight to the anklebiter(s) and to recognise your (no doubt) long suffering partner?
OB

 

[chevyontheriver]

Separately (and secretly ) I'm putting all this info into a spreadsheet and running it through multiple correlation equations.

Now you have me curious.

 

[Paidiske]

Great. I bet the congregation is counting down the hours to your delivery.

Hmm.

I hope you have also taken a break to eat, to bid goodnight to the anklebiter(s) and to recognise your (no doubt) long suffering partner?
OB

Sadly, ate leftovers at my desk. Anklebiter did get bid goodnight and the long-suffering other half is slaving away on work of his own.

Ah well. Aiming for a day off tomorrow.

 

[RDKirk]

Things you might consider adding:​

Contraception, universally considered immoral less than 100 years ago.
I noticed divorce was not on the list.
Acceptance or prohibition of drug and alcohol use
Pornography

Contraception was never universally considered immoral, except by Catholics.

 

[RDKirk]

The Changing Moral Landscape

Morality as defined by the Oxford Dictionary :

1. Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.
2. A particular system of values and principles of conduct.
3. The extent to which an action is right or wrong.

A couple of days ago I was thinking about the range of significant moral changes which have taken place within Western, nominally Christian, society over time. I started to make a list of changes, but it became obvious that “moral change” was a slippery concept. At first, I went looking for things which were once seen as wrong which are now seen as right (or vice versa) but soon realised that this was an oversimplification.

Change since when?

 

[Occams Barber]

Now you have me curious.

I'm half joking but its true about the spreadsheet. I'm trying to identify patterns.

So for instance, I'm coding each item with the direction it's shifted, e.g., wrong to right, wrong to neutral, right to wrong etc.

I've also added a code identifying whether the current societal view of a particular item's wrongness or rightness is consistent with Christian view. Its a bit subjective but it gives me a rough picture of whether society and Christianity are diverging or coming together on moral issues. If I had more data and a rough time period for each change I'd be able to see whether there's a trend towards more or less agreement

I'm also on the hunt for other factors which might explain shifts - hence my second question in the OP.

I often run data through correlation equations to see if there might be causal linkages but this data isn't suitable.

I doubt that the results will be earthshattering but its worth looking at.
OB

 

[Occams Barber]

Change since when?

I thought someone would ask.

I purposely left the 'from when' vague because I wasn't sure myself. Probably since they became Christianised but this leaves a lot of open territory.

If you look at the OP list it includes stuff like the Divine Right of Kings and same sex marriage - there's a lot of time between the two events.
OB

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

You're replying to my post - not Paidiske's.

Any cursory examination of the cultural shifts currently listed in the OP will show that societal movement has been towards the community.

I've been through the list to see where society is generally at and it's a direct repudiation of your selfishness theory.

Current societal attitudes disagree with slavery; poor treatment of non-combatants; racial, gender and religious discrimination: mistreating of non-conformists. Society also rejects white superiority and anti Semitism. US society is mixed on capital punishment but outside the US there's little argument. Nobody wants a return to beheading. We're all agreed that child marriage is wrong and that the age of consent should be set at a reasonable level.

On other issues in the list society has moved from considering them wrong to a relatively neutral position.

Believe it or not many of your 'traditional' (Christian?) norms are considered damaging.
OB

I disagree. That society today disagrees with these things, why we considered it 'moral shift', and then using that as arguing it is a movement toward community, is a circular argument.

Slavery ended as slaves became legal Persons, were granted rights as individuals - legally gained Habeas Corpus rights. As we stopped counting villages or plantations in hides or acres, but in persons. Racial discrimination or such, was the breakdown of the Corporate identity of one group, towards seeing in individual perspective. We no longer viewed Us as a monolith vs Them. This is most clear in non-conformism, as Cuius regio euis religio broke down, and it was no longer treasonous to disagree with the group. Divorce is taking the rights of the individual married person, above the family group - the old argument of staying together for the kids breaking down, or the view of two extended families united in some sense by marriage ties.

I sincerely cannot see how you can think any of these shifts are toward community - they are all clearly toward the Individual alone, most clearly on Abortion or sexuality issues. Often the community can act tyrannically, but taking it too far, the individual acts selfishly. Morality lies between, I'd say.

 

[KCfromNC]

I agree about the Divine Right of Kings. There was a time when this was an article of faith.

In the OP I talked about moral change within Western, nominally Christian, societies. Was a dancing ban applied broadly or was it confined to a couple of Christian sects?

Not really sure.

Was there a time when plural marriage was generally morally acceptable within Western society or was it limited to a small minority interest?

Among certain Christian groups it was obviously moral, now it isn't. Seems like it might be interesting to include, given that you've included things which matter to certain Christian groups but not broadly to Western society.

I actually recall when women were first allowed to wear pants to work - my then wife was one of the first to get into a pants suit. I can't recall the reasoning behind the ban. Was it moral or practical?

Probably a case of people confusing preferences or tradition with morality, just like lots of other issues in your list.

 

[PreviouslySeeking...]

Hmm.

What about spousal abuse or child abuse?

Seems to me that disciplining a wife or a child physically was once considered to be anywhere from neutral to good within Western Christian society. Now it is bad.

I know some will say abuse was always bad, but what we consider abuse now, wasn't abuse 100 years ago.

That is a shift I am happy about.

 

[chevyontheriver]

2. Are there common factors between the types of behaviour which have gained or lost moral ground? ‘Common factors’ might include things like new knowledge, ideological shifts or technological advances. Is there a direction to change?
OB

We can group the items. One grouping being sexual items. Then try to date them. My hunch is that a pattern would emerge among the sexual items, with contraception being the first in that group to change. Then divorce. Then abortion and pornography. Then homosexuality.

The meta-reason for these changes would be an increase in selfishness, narcisism, the self over the community, whatever.

But they would feed off each other. Like abortion does feed off contraception, because once one begins to say 'no' to a baby by contracepting, they continue to say 'no' by aborting their 'mistakes'. We had a so called 'sexual revolution' in the 1960's but the real revolution is happening now with every traditional moral mooring being swept aside. In comparison the 1960's was only the tickling of some fancies.

 

[Philip_B]

We can group the items. One grouping being sexual items. Then try to date them. My hunch is that a pattern would emerge among the sexual items, with contraception being the first in that group to change. Then divorce. Then abortion and pornography. Then homosexuality.

The meta-reason for these changes would be an increase in selfishness, narcisism, the self over the community, whatever.

But they would feed off each other. Like abortion does feed off contraception, because once one begins to say 'no' to a baby by contracepting, they continue to say 'no' by aborting their 'mistakes'. We had a so called 'sexual revolution' in the 1960's but the real revolution is happening now with every traditional moral mooring being swept aside. In comparison the 1960's was only the tickling of some fancies.

There are two interestingly competing themes in this area:

1. Making love without making babies
2. Making babies without making love

Part of the challenge is that fertility rises with adequate nutrition and falls in communities suffering deprivation, none the less rising affluence beyond these basic levels has historically led to lower fertility rates. That may be truer of the Western Traditions, where as in some traditions the reverse seems to be true, especially in communities where multiple marriages are allowed at the same time, rather than consecutively.

The rise of the importance of the individual following the reformation may be allied to this, however it would be difficult to demonstrate causality with any certainty.

 

[Occams Barber]

Among certain Christian groups it was obviously moral, now it isn't. Seems like it might be interesting to include, given that you've included things which matter to certain Christian groups but not broadly to Western society.

Probably a case of people confusing preferences or tradition with morality, just like lots of other issues in your list.

I don't think of the list as something cast in concrete so I'm more than willing to see individual items challenged. @RDKirk has already questioned contraception and I'm not sure that he isn't right. If you see something which you believe doesn't qualify as a 'moral' issue I'm happy to listen.

One of the many problems with this list is that, as you go back in time, the distinction between societal morality and Christian morality disappears. When church and state were practically the same thing then the idea of a separate secular morality was unimaginable.
OB

 

[Occams Barber]

Hmm.

What about spousal abuse or child abuse?

Seems to me that disciplining a wife or a child physically was once considered to be anywhere from neutral to good within Western Christian society. Now it is bad.

I know some will say abuse was always bad, but what we consider abuse now, wasn't abuse 100 years ago.

That is a shift I am happy about.

Thanks PS

There's a whole area here around the status of women which I've missed and which needs to be worked into the list. Part of the problem is identifying discrete items. Sometimes what seems to be a single issue can be like a Russian doll - open it up and there are more issues inside.

So, for instance; Does Spousal Abuse sit within the larger 'doll' of Female Equality or is it separate? Are Women's Rights the same as the Rights of a Spouse? If I open the 'doll' of Female Equality I can see smaller dolls like Equal Pay and Equal Opportunity. Any ideas would be appreciated. This is an area where society and Christianity can differ.

I think 'Children's Rights' can probably go into the list. There are some Christians here who still believe its OK (or even desirable) to hit a child although I don't see it as a view widely held within Christianity.

Note to Self: would the UN Charter of Human Rights be a good reference source??
OB

 

[hedrick]

• allowing interest on loans
• informed consent in sex [rape was always immoral, of course, but the modern emphasis on affirmative consent, with a prohibition of relationships in which consent might be diminished, is modern]
• prohibition of capital punishment [not universal, but pretty good concensus, as much so as other things on the list]
• prohibition of corporal punishment [ditto]
• mandatory action on spousal and child abuse [this was always in principle prohibited, but only recently is that prohibition being seriously implemented]

 

[Occams Barber]

We can group the items. One grouping being sexual items. Then try to date them. My hunch is that a pattern would emerge among the sexual items, with contraception being the first in that group to change. Then divorce. Then abortion and pornography. Then homosexuality.

The meta-reason for these changes would be an increase in selfishness, narcisism, the self over the community, whatever.

I'm also seeing sexual items as a discrete group. I'm also seeing discrimination which falls under the broader heading of Human Rights.

I'm going to disagree with you on meta reasons. While there may have been an uptick in selfishness etc. I don't think this is seminal and it's also fairly recent. Women's Lib/Equality arguments, for instance, go back to the turn of the 19th century. It blossomed in the 1960s on the back of contraceptive pill technology and led to the sexual revolution. The Pill essentially minimised the practical problems of sexual activity. Removing this practical limitation exposed the weakness of the (Christian) moral argument, i.e., it's wrong because the Bible/tradition says its wrong. From this you get female independence and the rest is history. I think that Christianity has largely lost its moral force and this probably goes back to the time where church and state began to go their separate ways. One of the major meta-meta forces is probably the accelerating acquisition of knowledge of how the world works.

OB

 

[hedrick]

think that Christianity has largely lost its moral force and this probably goes back to the time where church and state began to go their separate ways. One of the major meta-meta forces is probably the accelerating acquisition of knowledge of how the world works.

I would argue that the big reason Christianity has lost moral authority is because visible Christians were so consistently on the wrong side. Of course this isn't true of all Christians, but the Bible was used to defend slavery, racial discrimination, gender discrimination, and discrimination against gays and transgenders.

Until fairly recently, Christians tended to be associated with moral advances. That was surely that case in Roman times, and I think also in absorbing the "barbarians" after Rome. Even in more recent times, Christians took the lead in caring for sick and others who couldn't care for themselves.

Until recently, polls shows that non-Christians might think Christians were deluding themselves about God, but at least they were good people. Today for the first time, non-Christians tend to think of Christians as opposing moral standards.

 

[Occams Barber]

Thanks Hedrick

allowing interest on loans

Agreed - although there has always been a deal of hypocrisy around usury like shifting the problem to the Jewish community. Even Christian money lenders were fiddling the system by things like inflating the price of goods to hide the interest component with the connivance of their customers.

nformed consent in sex [rape was always immoral, of course, but the modern emphasis on affirmative consent, with a prohibition of relationships in which consent might be diminished, is modern

This is probably the 'Rape in Marriage' concept - another one of the myriad of female related shifts I need to work into the list.

prohibition of capital punishment [not universal, but pretty good concensus, as much so as other things on the list]

Agreed - It's already on the list.

prohibition of corporal punishment [ditto]

This probably fits under the general idea of Prohibiting Torture which is something I need to add.

mandatory action on spousal and child abuse [this was always in principle prohibited, but only recently is that prohibition being seriously implemented]

I'm about to put Children's Rights into the list to cover the abuse itself. Spousal abuse is also a part of the larger Female Rights componenet I'm currently struggling with.

I see mandatory reporting as a practical reinforcement of an existing moral rule rather than a something new.
OB

 

[Paidiske]

That's an interesting point about mandatory reporting. Maybe it is something new; the idea that it is good and right to compel that action...

 

[Tutorman]

I am not sure about this but at one time it was expected to dress nice for Church and now you can dress any old way to go to Church.