Freedom As Foundation For Moral Acts

Nowadays, our ordinary moral thinking is under a tremendous strain, for two reasons. On the
one hand, it is brought into a kind of competition with a mode of thinking that is quite different in
nature. Of course I have in mind the technological thinking which in our times has become the
dominant cast of mind, at least in Western societies. While the main criteria of ethical thinking are good
and evil or right and wrong, technological thinking has as its main criteria efficiency and considers
only effectiveness in all our operations, how to make things go faster, how to reduce cost, etc.

On the other hand, people today may have to face the fact that their neighbors have quite
different moral standards that they may nevertheless have to recognize to be as valid as their own, even
if they find them repulsive and unacceptable for themselves. They have to do so because we live in a
pluralistic society that seems to admit conflicting moral principles as being equally valid, the same
action being accepted as both right and wrong at the same time (e.g. that abortion is considered both
morally right and morally wrong within a given society). This contradiction, which seems to be written
into contemporary ethical pluralism, has lead many people to think that there are no objective standards
of morality, that justice is finally nothing but a matter of convention, if not of taste or, if you like, an
arbitrary matter. If I say that something is right, then it is right – at least for me! And you have to
respect that it is right for me, even if it is wrong for you. This tolerance is fine – until we realize that it
leads us into a position where the objective character of moral standards is denied, and nothing –
absolutely nothing – is considered right or wrong in itself, but rather as a matter for arbitrary decision.
This leads to an ethical nihilism that has been growing as a natural, but ill-fated, reaction to moralistic
paternalism, which tells people how to behave and does not tolerate diversity in customs and life-styles.

Ethical nihilism is nothing new among those who consider their personal power, fame, or
wealth to be the only things worth fighting for. But the fact that many people believe that they can
decide by themselves what is right and what is wrong is something new and most peculiar.
Technological thinking is nothing new either, and there have always been people who have been
fascinated by the latest technological innovations. In fact, there is nothing wrong with that as such. But
the fact that many people take technological thinking to be the only rational way of thinking about
human life and the universe is something new. It is also profoundly disturbing, because it means putting
aside considerations about the complex moral phenomena that pertain to the ideals of justice, love, and
freedom, to mention again these three terms which refer to core elements of our moral world.

Of course these terms – justice, love, and freedom – are so solemn, so loaded with meaning, and
used and misused to such an extent, that the idea of not having to employ them any more may feel
liberating. It is like escaping from terrifying parents who do not let their children lead their own lives. I
was in fact terrified of having – in a moment of carelessness, or was it arrogance? – composed the title
of this paper, which may sound unbearably pretentious, and wanted to change it to something more
neutral, such as “Three perspectives on ethical decision.

Do we seriously want to get rid of these burdensome notions of justice, love and freedom? If so,
we only have to give in to the tyranny of the technological mind, which is not only ready to rule the
external world of things and products, but also the internal world of our thoughts and desires. A friend
of mine, a specialist on commercials, tells me that the ultimate dream in that technological field will be
attained when people’s dreams at night will be interrupted every twenty minutes for a commercial
break!
 Technological thinking is indeed the greatest instrument of liberation at our disposal and we can
use it to build up as well as to tear down whatever we fancy. For the last two centuries or so, we have
inadvertently been using it to tear down old moral systems, and it is not clear what has replaced them.
There is no doubt that what is most needed today is a commonly accepted moral system that people can
use within modern technological environments in order to organize and lead their life together without
meaningless fights and endless suffering. This is true even from a strictly technological perspective,
because technological thought has no means of setting up its own goals. It goes wild and does the most
horrible things if it is not led by ethical thinking. To say “this end is worth pursuing”, “this is what
ought to be done”, “this is certainly good for you”, requires an ethical thought which evaluates and
judges what is truly good and right for living beings on this planet. If modern technology is to be used
properly, and we are not to be victims of the illusion of a complete technological control over life, we
must reject ethical nihilism and try to see what matters in our morality.