To be or not to be-Part V; Moral Choices

I knew a few drops of whisky could hit my senses and make my head go around. But recently I was, in a matter of few hours, exposed to two extremes of justice and morality and the experience was enough to make me dizzy.

It started with me spending some time with a person whom I describe as the Bhishma because of his stature, his acute sense of right and wrong, his confidence and willingness to stand up for what is right and his strategic acumen . We spent some time discussing about challenges we face if we decide to take positions which could rock the boat or force some change.

On the way back home from the meeting I was reading the book “The idea of justice” by Amartya Sen. The discussion with Bhishma still alive in my mind, I was able to better appreciate what he meant in his heavy and erudite style when he explains “It is fair to assume that Parisians would not have stormed the Bastille, Gandhi would not have challenged the empire on which the sun used not to set, Martin Luther King would not have fought white supremacy in ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave’, without their sense of manifest injustices that could be overcome. They were not trying to achieve a perfectly just world (even if there were any agreement on what that would be like), but they did want to remove clear injustices to the extent they could.”

The various facets of this thought were floating in my mind and I was trying to relate the same to the challenges that we face on our day-to-day life. I came back home and decided to relax a bit with some light humour and put on the old serial “Yes Minister” which portrays the blunt reality of the world; the world of political expediency, horse trading, empire building and corruption. Particularly, in the context of what I was discussing and reading during the day the contrast was striking.

“Being in a cabinet minister is a complex business Annie. So many conflicting considerations” Said Minister Hacker

“Like whether to do the right thing or the wrong thing?” Asked his wife Annie

“I must tell you about government. You must always try to do the right thing. But you must try never to get caught doing the right thing, because doing right is wrong.” Hacker continued.

“The thing about the government is principle. The thing about principle is you must never rock the boat. Because if you do all the little consciousness will fall out”

“You must always follow your conscience; but you must know where you are going. So you can’t follow your conscience; because it may not be going the way you are going.”

I could not stop laughing. I felt totally spaced out; sort of intoxication of mind. It reminded me of the conflicts we face between our intentions and compulsions, the challenges of wanting to do the right thing and the need to be ‘pragmatic’, the difference between profits and exploitation, being a responsible corporate citizen and maximising the shareholder value at any cost.

These are questions for which it is difficult to find the right answer. These are issues for which we have to make our own choices. The collective total of the choices each of us makes will determine where our society is going. But, if we wait for the other person to take the lead, it is going to be a long wait.The thought expressed by Immanuel Kant “Bringing reason to the world becomes the enterprise of morality rather than metaphysics, and the work as well as the hope of humanity” (quoted by Dr Amartya Sen in his book “The Idea of Justice) makes this point much more elegantly.

“Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you are a good person is little like expecting a bull not to attack you because you are a vegetarian” Dennis Wholey