Editorial: Develop your own moral framework

Whether we realize it or not, our daily lives are rife with small moral dilemmas: to cheat or… Whether we realize it or not, our daily lives are rife with small moral dilemmas: to cheat or not to cheat; to pirate or not to pirate. Unfortunately, according to some pundits, we’re more ill-equipped to address these issues than ever before.

This past Monday, New York Times columnist David Brooks brought to his readers’ attention “Lost in Transition,” a new book that casts our generation’s moral sensibility, or lack thereof, in a particularly damning light. In 2008, author Christian Smith and his team of Notre Dame researchers interviewed 230 young adults ages 18 to 23 from across America, asking them pointed questions about “moral dilemmas and the meaning of life.” Their answers, according to Brooks, were enough to make any intelligent ethicist cringe.

Rather than providing a sensible analysis of these topics, the interviewees responded with “anything goes” nonchalance — what Brooks defines as “moral individualism” and “nonjudgmentalism.” As one subject put it: “I mean, I guess what makes something right is how I feel about it. But different people feel different ways, so I couldn’t speak on behalf of anyone else as to what’s right and wrong.”

Unsurprisingly, Brooks believes he’s identified the source of this phenomenon. “Morals,” he quotes Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor as arguing, “have become separated from moral sources” — that is, the institutions that provide ethical frameworks.

It’s true, of course, that we’ve become divorced from the foundations that used to guide our beliefs. But ultimately, who can blame us? The Catholic Church — perhaps the foremost source of moral guidance in America — continues to undermine its status through sex-abuse cover-ups. The U.S. government, which also functions as a moral arbiter, further tarnished its reputation with a string of fiascos, including the disclosure of Valerie Plame’s identity and the spin doctoring of the Iraq War. In addition, due to the Internet, more people know of this misbehavior than ever before. And then there’s the media — an institution that over the past several years has become synonymous with partisan, know-nothing pundits, vapid aggregator sites and celebrity-centered “breaking news,” not to mention a few debacles of its own (see the Duke lacrosse frenzy, the Killian documents).

Given this degradation of institutional legitimacy, it’s no wonder young people withhold the judgments they might have voiced in earlier decades, when they still operated under established principles. We simply can’t trust ethical authorities anymore.

Rather than bemoaning our morally adrift condition, however, we believe this is a fantastic opportunity for young adults to think critically and openly about what constitutes right and wrong, rather than being spoon-fed opinions from the aforementioned organizations. In other words, question every prevailing belief and leave no taboo unscrutinized. Develop your own standards.

Of course, we’re not advocating that young people take ethical dilemmas lightly, as many of the respondents in “Lost in Transition” did. Rather, we’d prefer that young adults fashion moral codes for themselves — codes that don’t rely on pre-established values (some of which, like homosexuality’s immorality, are antiquated). If that entails acceptance of previously frowned-upon behaviors, then so be it.

But then again, why listen to us? Don’t let The Pitt News dictate your beliefs — that, ultimately, is up to you.