Socrates: The question before us is "the crisis in the moral fabric of contemporary life in our society". This a pretty big topic.

Rather than tackle the issue head on, we better start with some preliminary skirmishes to see where the battle lines are drawn.

The first questions we ought to look at then are "Who says there is a "moral crisis?" Why do they think there is a "crisis", or, to put it another way, What is happening that constitutes this crisis?

Plato:

As many as 60% to 75% of US citizens, depending on the poll, report that they think we are in a "serious state of moral decay" and call it exactly that.

This comes from articles in all kinds of publications, the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Newsweek, Foreign Affairs.

Parmenides:

And why do these people think there is a crisis?

Plato: Actually you get different kinds of lists depending on who you talk to. You have one list consisting of: crime on the streets; drugs, teenage pregnancies, etc.

Making up the list of the another group are layoffs, vast disparity of incomes, lack of concern for the poor. The moral crisis for this group is seen as growing economic inequalities.

Parmenides: A deviation from the standards of distributive justice?

Plato: Yes, exactly.

Socrates: So, even though people would agree there is a moral crisis, it seems that once you have them list what counts as a crisis, seems pretty divergent.

Plato: Very much so.

Socrates: No consensus for a solution?

Plato: Not really. And that may be a major part of the problem. The lists reflect different kinds of political constituent groups. Those described as Liberals think morality is in economic issues and those described as Conservatives link it to sexual mores or law and order issues. The definition of morality seems to have become politicized to the point it is difficult to have a debate on moral questions outside of political categories.

Gorgias: Some might not see it as a moral crisis at all. A sociologist has suggested that based on his surveys there is really no moral crisis -- that the rumor of a crisis in the moral fabric of society is greatly exaggerated, if not simply wrong-headed.

Socrates: Who is it that says there is no moral crisis?

Georgias: A scholar from the Netherlands, a Dutchman.

It is an article from a United Nations publication that initially studied the Western European countries with the United States included for comparative purposes. It listed various items as to what would constitute a moral decline, including things from joy riding to avoiding traffic fines, to euthanasia and abortion. There are 20 or so indicators -- and then he tested to see whether people still thought that these things were to be avoided on moral grounds.

The answers to the questions indicated that civic virtue had eroded quite badly, right across the board. The obligations to society in general which come in under civic virtue are no longer felt and this is true of the Scandinavian countries across to Eastern Europe.

Parmenides: Sort of confirms the Robert Bellah thesis in "Habits of the Heart."

Gorgias: He cites Bellah, and MacIntyre.

Parmenides: It seems crazy to say that decline of civic virtue wouldn't be called a "moral crisis".

Gorgias: His idea it is that although people in Western Europe have moved away from things like civic virtues, they still have concerns about morality of a personal nature, more along the lines of a sexual morality.

Since there is still concern about some kind of personal morality then there is no moral crisis.

Plato: And how do we hold society together without civic virtue?

Parmenides: A good question.The question maybe.

Socrates: But lets go back to the situation in the United States where we seem to have two differing views and two lists of items that constitute the moral crisis.

One says personal virtue is important to public order and that therefore pornography, divorce, teenage pregnancies destroy the social order. And the other list says that economic equity or economic fairness is important to a moral society.

Are these necessarily mutually exclusive? Might they be different sides of the same coin?

Parmenides: Both sides might say they are defining the most important civic virtues. One side, the Conservatives, saying that if we observe personal moral virtues that we will have a better civitas. The other, the so-called Liberals, saying that you can't have civitas at all without a social moral virtues.

Let see if we can get beyond the impasse with some new definitions. Civic morality has to do with accepting duties as given by society and owed to all members of society or society in general. We all need to do everything possible to hold society together, especially keeping people form being left out of the society because they have been left out of the economy. This would say that social justice or economic justice is a part of civic virtue.

Personal morality has to do with what I owe to myself in order to become a virtuous person. I shouldn't take illegal drugs, deal in pornography, engage in sex outside of marriage etc. for my own good. But since my actions also influence others, this also has positive secondary effects on society. This would say that personal virtue is a necessary part of civic virtue.

Both rely on a sense of moral duty. There is no reason in principle why you couldn't establish the same duties that come into the civic virtue from a personal point of view.

Plato: In other words to show from a personal point of view that I also have a "personal duty" not only to be a mortal person but to make sure that economic inequalities are not too extreme?

Laches: That's it. But would some think that that is simply a replay of the "Liberal position"? Is it really possible to reestablish economic justice on the basis of a personal moral altruism?

Gorgias: It might be that it isn't helping other people or economic justice that the Conservatives oppose but simply that they no longer believe our economic institutions are able deliver on the promise of the Great Society of New Deal or whatever, the programs that relate to economic equity.

Plato: Another aspect of the moral crisis? I mean this perceived inability on the part of the governing institutions to deliver on the promise of a better society.

Meno: Very much so I would suppose. A very important part. The problem in our society strikes me more along the lines of a crisis of faith in a way, not quite a moral crisis. By faith, I mean particularly faith in institutions; the faith in the political process that a particular set of political practices or policies can really deliver anymore.

Plato: Right. And it isn't just the failure to deliver on promises economic justice that is a problem for Conservatives. It is the failure to deliver a safe environment, decent schools, traditional values. The Gingrich movement if it meant anything seemed to say that government can't do anything right.

Meno: But maybe all this frustration shouldn't be focused all on the federal government. Maybe we are picking out the wrong target for our frustrations.

It strikes me how much the crisis of faith in institutions is tied to factors that really are beyond people's control, including the control of politicians, factors like the international economy and the way that has an impact on jobs, career possibilities, and purchasing power, so on.

IATH WWW Server

Center's Home

New Dialogue Main Page