I have been engaged in an interesting conversation with an individual in regard to the war between Israel and the Palestinians (actually more akin to a slaughter than a war due to the huge disparity in power). During this discussion the individual refused to condemn any of Hama’s actions.
Their reasoning was that due to what the Palestinians have suffered, not just now but for decades, and due to the almost hopeless situation on October 7th, 2023 in regards to finding other ways to receive justice, correct wrongs, and make their voice heard, that the those of us who were not in that same situation were therefor not in a position to pass judgement on what Hamas did. When I brought up the immorality of some of Hamas’s actions their response was that because of this oppression and hopelessness morality does not matter in this case. They would neither promote nor condemn these actions. My impression of the argument is that if the oppression is so bad and so long then it is in a category by itself and it is not for anyone outside to pass any moral judgement on the actions the oppressed think necessary.
I was rather struck by the idea that in certain situations morality does not matter. Or perhaps, it is not as relevant. It is the first time I have ever had someone seriously argue this. After some thought and research – for which I am grateful to this person for motivating me to do – I found that both my thoughtful consideration and my initial reaction were in accord – I disagree. While understanding why an action was done is important, the why does not shield it from being evaluated for its morality. Nor should it.
The reason why I disagree is because we are highly social creatures. In fact, this is essential to our nature. It is one of the two reasons why our species has survived and flourished, our ability, indeed our need, to form groups. Coupled with our high intelligence and our ability to form not just groups but very large groups, morality is an essential part of forming and maintaining any and all groups. It helps provide the guidelines and standards necessary for the formation of any group. To disregard the morality of any given action is to ignore an essential part of being human.
Some will say that morality is largely subjective, and dependent upon a particular culture and society. That to view the actions of one group through the moral lens of another, especially that between an oppressed people and the oppressor, is wrong and flawed. To which I would acknowledge that there is an element of truth to that. But not the whole truth. Or even most of it.
Morality is a fuzzy thing. However, it is a fuzzy thing that has an objective basis. This basis is twofold – the traits we evolved to cause us to be social creatures, such as empathy, reciprocity, a sense of fairness, etc. And then those social structures resulting from these traits form and shape those traits and, with trial and error wind up promoting good societies that can survive. Something that is on always on-going project, especially given the size and complexity of our societies.
I am not going to go into all the intricacies of morality. At the end of this blog there are some references for your reading pleasure should you wish to pursue further.
Instead though I am wanting to emphasize that it is our ability to form societies that has led to human survival. Without that we would be extinct. And our morality is an essential part of that survival trait. To say that morality has no role to play in evaluating the actions of humans in some situations is to say that we cannot use our common humanity to evaluate human actions. That seems nonsensical to me.
I think this is clearly seen if we take this idea that no judgement can be made on the actions of an oppressed people who are fighting their oppressors to its logical extreme.
Imagine that one of the many groups of Jewish partisans in Nazi Europe decided to start kidnapping German citizens who had no connection to the military, politicians, war industries, or law enforcement. They kidnap whole families, including children and babies. Then then they stripped them, make them labor on short food and water for weeks with frequent beatings before packing them all into gas chambers. Would their actions be moral? Should we avoid condemning these actions because the Jews were most definitely oppressed during this time, to the point of being almost rendered extinct in Europe?
This points towards another aspect of the necessity of moral judgements. Solutions are going to have to be moral, and just. Otherwise, the problem will continue on and only the veneer will have changed. In trying to atone for their treatment of the Jews over thousands of years, Europe and the US created another injustice and immoral act. Which is why we have our current bloodshed.
Two final points on this.
First, immoral actions never make other immoral actions moral or right. The immoral actions committed by Hamas on October 7th do not justify the current actions of Israel. Not in the slightest.
Second, while saying a given action is immoral, understanding why it was done is just as important in deciding how to act and react to that immoral act. In ignoring the cause of Hamas immoral actions – the decades long series of injustices being committed by the Israel against the Palestinians – no true solution will be found. Only more pain and suffering and needless deaths. Only more immoral actions and immoral reactions.
Some interesting reads on a very complex subject.
“Seven Moral Rules Found Around the World“, Oxford
“Is There a Universal Morality? Introduction and Overview of Responses“, Prosocial World
“Culture and the Evolution of Human Cooperation“, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
“The Evolution of Morality“, Evolution; education and outreach
Leave a comment