Morality is complex. The moral choices that one makes cannot be easily divided into right and wrong, because right and wrong, good and bad, and correct and incorrect ideas are choices that human beings make, depending on the circumstances they are in. The discussion on what is the right choice is an ancient one. Myths, logic, and a lot of thought have gone into making a discourse on the right moral choice. Where do we stand now? Where is India in this framework? What are the moral choices that are in front of our country, in this day and age?
The philosophical take on morality
The morality question is raised right from religious doctrines like the Gita, to philosophical texts like the critique of practical reason, and even though centuries separate these thoughts, some of them coincidently are similar. If one looks to the Greeks and particularly to Plato’s dialogues, a general overview might suggest that ‘Happiness’ or well-being (Eudaimonia) is the highest aim of moral conduct, and virtues (aretê) are the necessary skills to attain them. Aristotle, like Plato, regarded ethical virtues like justice, courage, as complex rational, emotional and social skills. But differs from Plato, in what Plato suggests that to be completely virtuous one needs a training in sciences, mathematics and philosophy. According to Aristotle, ‘What we need, in order to live well, is a proper appreciation of the way in which such goods as friendship, pleasure, virtue, honor and wealth fit together as a whole.’
If one travels in time and through countries, one might reach Germany in their quest to make the right moral choice. Philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his Critique of practical reason and The groundwork of metaphysics of morals, discussed moral choices at length and had a more reason centric deduction in his analysis. In his work, he put forth the ‘Categorical imperative’, which is the central philosophical concept attuning to the morality principle. He states in three formulations what he means by categorical imperative.
In the first formulation he states: ‘Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law’.
In what is an interesting analysis, many theorists have posited a similarity between Kant’s postulations and the Bhagavad Gita. In the Gita, Krishna quotes, ‘He who performs a duty as a thing that ought to be done, renouncing all attachment and also the fruit – his relinquishment is regarded as one of ‘goodness’.” In a similar vein, Kant posits in the first proposition of morality, that to have genuine moral worth, an action must be done from duty. So for both, a duty is to be performed for duty’s sake, no other emotions, feelings or outcomes should be in consideration while performing one’s duty. While the two can be thought to be similar, but the source of where one understands one’s duties are different when comparing the Gita and Kant’s seminal work. For Kant duty stems from reason and is autonomous, but in the Gita, duty is in relation to the varna one is born in, for example the kshatriya is born to fight in war and govern in peace. While there is some argument that the Gita refers to these duties as they stem from one’s own self (Gauchhwal, 1964, moral religion of Kant and karmayoga of the Gita), some theorists like Keya Mitra (In her paper comparing Bhagvad Gita and Kant, A lesson in comparative philosophy) posit that if we unpack the idea of autonomy in Kant, it cannot be applied in the same sense to the Gita.
The moral dilemma
Another aspect when one considers morality and the question of right and wrong, one has to consider ‘moral dilemmas’. A moral dilemma is a conflict in which you have to choose between two or more actions and have moral reasons for choosing each action. The entire discussion of morality and the right thing to do leads to a final discussion of moral dilemmas, which is a point of choice. As we know, morality is an ethical position, and is a matter of choice. Most moral choices that people make have immediate and long term consequences, and that is where morality becomes complex. A soldier who has to make a choice, as to whether he has to go to war to save the country to be invaded, or to stay back and save his bed ridden mother, who has no one to take care of her, is a complex dilemma. Each choice has an immediate and definitive consequence when compared to the other. Which one should the soldier choose? Is there a right choice? What categorises as his duty? Is it reasonable and universal, and undeniably autonomous?
India today is in the middle of many moral choices, the most complex one is the question of development. The commitment to create new infrastructure, new technologies, new ways to subsist economy, and to feed the needs of one of the most populous countries in the world is a monumental task, the morally right development plan for such a large population is a dilemma itself, especially when the definition of development is so fluid. The meaning of development for the adivasi population is markedly different compared to the urban metropolises like Mumbai, Delhi or Chennai. The question of equality is also a dilemma, especially in state as diverse as India. The varna system does divide and casteism has been a part of the Indian ways for eternity. Every other day, one reads about violent episodes associated with caste. In a country with many languages, Gods, and ideologies, the judiciary faces a dilemma to bring about equality. According to Kant, each member of the state is equal in front of the law, that is he or she has the right to invoke the power of the state to enforce the laws on one’s behalf, and this is compatible to the inequality of the members of the state in income, physical power, and possessions. But if the inequality of income and other parameters infringes into the space of one’s ability to invoke the laws on one’s behalf, then how does one exercise one’s right? The state and its complex machinery of law have to answer this question. The right to execute one’s power to be treated equally is an important tenet in the machinery of the state.
The morality discourse is a very complex one, but is a very important one. In a country which has millions of people, who are in the midst of making moral choices and decisions that affect the lives of others and of themselves, one should consider a bit of contemplation on what is right; and what is right, is not necessarily what is good.
[/column][column size=”4/5″]
Nikhil Katara
Nikhil Katara initiated his journey as a writer with his own production titled The Unveiling, a science fiction drama in the year 2011. To strengthen critical learning he initiated an MA programme in ‘Philosophy’ at the Mumbai university with optionals in Kant, Greek Hellinistic Philosophy, Femi- nism, Logic and Existentialism. His play Yatagarasu opened at Prithvi Theatre in 2016. He is a consultant facilitator at J’s paradigm (a novel performance arts institute) and writes book reviews for the Free Press Journal.[/column]