Amidst all the hullabaloo, my quench to reach to the real face of morality is still not fulfilled. But from all these years that I have experienced in worldly affairs, I am able to draw a synopsis about it. What I have felt is morality to be subjective, biased and influential. I am of the opinion that every individual has got their respective references to judge their morality. The reference can be a holy book or some lesson right in the childhood which gets engraved in the nascent mind to an extent to carry it forward for the rest of the life or some verdicts passed on by tradition. Morality differs from one subject to the other and most of the times it perpetuates by sheer biasness. Morality is biased to prejudices as well as biased to influence.
A woman in a short dress helping a starving orphan will have various viewpoints. One section will see one aspect of the act and will justify it as an act of morality while there will also be another section which will bash her for being immoral and curse her to hell for donning the revealing outfit that might entice the men. For the second section, her showing off her skin, overshadowed the other aspect of her act of feeding the orphan. For a man, going on a killing spree by exploding a bomb following the verdicts of his object of holiness, might be his utmost moral deed but at the same time this act will be considered immoral and will be condemned by another. What is defined unethical by one can be dully believed to be ethical by the other. Aborting a fetus is one such instance. Certain people believe killing a fetus to be immoral and against the holy rules. They believe it to be a living entity killing of which might lead them to face the flames of hell. While there are some who believe it is better to cease the growth of cells before bringing it to the world and not being able to sustain its life. Likewise everyone will have their own moral take and accordingly will go on protesting or justifying celibacy, chastity, monogamy, polygamy, homosexuality, public breastfeeding, gory murders and even heinous rapes.
It is quite prominent that moral values of a person mostly depends on the faith of scriptures that he follows or on the long running prejudices. It is seen that people take pride in maintaining those prejudices in the name of morality. Often the customs and traditions are commingled with the concept of morality which creates a lot of confusion and complexity. The fact that is really saddening is some people try to impose their denotation of morality on others. The cult of moral police who nonchalantly abuse and torture the masses in an attempt to spread their moral ideologies is one such example. There is again another lot of intellects who believe widening their horizon of thoughts will add value to their morality. This class thinks logic is everything all about morality, demeaning the sensitivity aspect of it. They will mock the practice of moral thoughts of others in a way declaring their superiority over the others. The conflict regarding which version of morality is superior amongst others is one of the root causes of all the chaos in the world.
The big question is how will we differentiate the real vice from virtue? Who will guide us to correctly interpret our misinterpretations? Can everyone in the world ever come to a common ground of understanding of morality? Wouldn’t the world be a more sorted and peaceful one if everyone would have developed their morality through their experiences rather than lessons, through observations rather than prejudices or influences, through wisdom rather than intellect, through reasoning rather than evaluation?