Can morality be avoided altogether?

Is there any philosophy or other human endeavour that does not engage with it? Even within the context of a political philosophy that does not address the question of what humans should do (or, for the same purposes, within the context of any other human endeavour), it is impossible to altogether avoid morality, to claim amorality (even the negative connotations of the term revealing the impossibility of the endeavour) in any one of our actions. With information processing explained through need (and opportunity), the question can be asked as to whether this focus on need is not already some kind of morality. In its effort to explain how things are, and in replying that this is how they need to be, does this approach not adopt an ultimately conservative viewpoint? Does it not ultimately reveal a certain morality, that of affirmation, of acceptance of things as they came to be? The same is, after all, true of any human endeavour. If it is accepted that states are individualisation mechanisms for humans, as suggested in this analysis, does this not reveal a certain morality as well? Should humans exist as individuals at all? Or should we be, for example, numbered animals—with numbering resetting locally and periodically so that no identification across time and space is possible? (The state in this case providing the numbering anyway—revealing even in this hypothetical scenario that states are natural (necessary, as per their nature, see §05.00.05) to humans.) Similarly, any social interaction (business, employment etc.) or scientific discovery (from its assumptions to the way it is used) also invariably reveals a certain kind of morality. Difficulties, however, are also met with a hypothetical question. A hypothetical question about how things could have been (the suggestion of how things should be thus revealing the morality of the speaker) is useful in opening up new perspectives and elucidating overlooked aspects. However, being hypothetical, not only does it miss the reality test, which would after all demonstrate its worthiness (or from the opposing viewpoint, the fact that it was never reality is an argument for its unworthiness), but it too also reveals a morality: that of the person who asks it.

Navigate: ← §23.00.02.00 · Corpus · §23.00.03.01 →