The issue concerning torture has brought about a very important debate; one about the moral bearing of the American people. The President has said on countless occasions, regarding the previous administration, that America during the last eight years– because of torture– lost its moral bearing and he pledged that during his administration America would regain that which was lost. I do not want to make this about what the President said, although it is the catalyst of my discussion. What I really want to get at is a singular definition of America’s moral bearing. I guarantee you that in the end, you will realize there is none.

The moral philosophies employed by Americans have been of common sense and expediency. What I would like to know, from the President or anyone else, is what is America’s moral bearing?  Is there a defined moral in the United States?  The reason I am asking is that I know that there isn’t a defining moral ideology to which the American people subscribe.  In fact, Americans possess a variety of morals and philosophies that we have incorporated at different times throughout our history and in our own lives.

The philosophy that the President is purposefully incorporating, as it regards torture, is the Kantian philosophy.  This philosophy says that if something is wrong then it is wrong all the time regardless of the consequences.  The people on the left reference John McCain where he says that torture is wrong, proves that in their view, since we have established that torture is wrong, it is wrong all the time.  The problem with this philosophy in its extreme is this: suppose your neighbor abuses his wife and one day she came to hide in your house because she suspected he was going to come home in a drunken stupor. He notices that she isn’t home so he comes to you and asks if you saw his wife. The Kantian philosophy says, since lying is wrong it is wrong all the time and your responsibility is to give the wife over to her husband to be abused. Obviously, you wouldn’t do that but that’s the problem with solely using the Kantian philosophy. The people on the left are taking that approach as it regards torture.

The philosophy employed by Conservatives on this issue is the utilitarian philosophy.  With this philosophy, the end justifies the means.  Now some people have a problem with this and I do too. On one hand, no one can arrive at an end without a means and on the other hand, the end does not justify all means. Conservatives argue that though torture is wrong, as they deal with terrorists, they are not willing to say we will never torture because if in a situation where the benefits are weighed against the cost and it’s more beneficial to torture that individual they will employ torture. Judging by the examples that the Conservatives have used to justify their logic they question their opponents and ask, what if 3000 Americans were to die, would you not torture the guys who orchestrated the 9-11 attacks? In their view, this is a rhetorical question. This philosophy is called the utilitarian philosophy.  In their view if an attack on the American people is inevitable they will do whatever was necessary to prevent it. This philosophy deals with weighing the cost against the benefits.

This is not to say that liberals are Kantian and conservatives are utilitarian in general; this is only the case as it regards torture while on other issues they hold contrary philosophies. So on just those two philosophies we’ve seen that America has never established a singular moral philosophy by which we refer to as our moral bearing.  But wait there are more.

There is also what is referred to as the positivists moral philosophy which says that if the government makes a law, the citizens are obligated to submit to it even if it’s not something they agree with him.  We see this in two instances. The first instance is with Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights movement where they opposed the Jim Crow laws.  Now if Americans had subscribed to the positivists moral then Martin Luther King would have had absolutely no right to do what he did but obviously we know that we don’t subscribe to the positivists moral and Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement is a case in point.  On this same issue there is also the Roe versus Wade Supreme Court decision where though many conservatives and mainstream Americans believe that abortion is the killing of innocent life, going out and blowing up buildings or killing people is unacceptable. Once again we have another moral philosophy that we have employed that doesn’t necessarily define us.

And then finally there is the relativists philosophy which says, what I do with my life is none of your business. Who are you to tell me how to live my life? What is good for me may not be good for you but because it’s not good for you does not mean it’s bad for me. Everybody else is doing it.

These are four of the different moral philosophies that we as Americans have employed throughout our history in one case or the other. As you have noticed and if you are honest, the Kantian philosophy is no more the Americans moral than the others.

Nevertheless, as it generally is with politics, clarity is absent and one politician sees it in his best interest to demean the other and claim that the philosophy and moral that is expedient for him to employ is the American moral. The truth is, Americans don’t have a singular moral philosophy and to employ any of the above is not a sign of losing our moral bearing. These varying philosophies are what made us Americans.

Tags: Moral, moral bearing, Obama, President Obama, torture

3 Responses to “America’s Moral Bearing”

Leave a Reply