Morality, where do we see it?

Francis Schaeffer is sometimes considered the progenitor of the Evangelical movement in the second half of the 20^th century. In his seminal work “How Then Shall We Live”, he begins by looking at failed civilizations and philosophies over thousands of years. Without very much background or logical connection, something Click and Clack the Tappet Brothers might call “unencumbered by the thought process”, he concludes therefore, that there must be an ultimate truth, a source of wisdom beyond human ability and that must be the God of the Christian Bible.

This offer of an answer to the questions of how to live, to me, is not different than the offerings of a populist leader who does not acknowledge the input of the people they are leading. They are the opposite of the leader who says, “it was a team effort”, when asked how they succeeded. Examples of that form of cooperative leadership at high levels are hard to find. Democracy is an attempt to formalize it at a national level but we’re still experimenting. Mythology passed down to Indigenous cultures might contain lessons.

One of those is the Seventh Generation Principle. It comes to the modern Western world from the Iroquois Confederacy of tribes around what is now Lake Ontario in pre-Columbian North America. Some of their ideas inspired the United States Constitution but the idea of considering the impact of decisions on future generations was dumped, overridden by the culture of Capitalism and short-term gains.

Early diaries of European explorers of North American speak of settled areas that had been abandoned. Germ theory had not yet been discovered, so we can forgive them for not understanding where everyone went. Later however, this was forgotten or more likely changed to the story of how those Europeans “tamed” the wilderness. The practices of forest management and hunting that preserved species didn’t result in walled cities and wide roads, so for centuries European methods have been considered superior. The impending failure of those methods is finally drawing that consideration into question.

Spiritual practices are difficult to understand from the outside, so I hesitate to comment on them. I will stick to less controversial statements. Connection to the land and a reverence for nature is easily recognized in writing and stories. Some tribes use the term “two-spirit” or something similar to describe a person with masculine and feminine gender identities. This is something that is rarely honored in other cultures the way N.A. culture has. Also, in my recent interactions with American Natives alive today, I have heard expressions of belief that are unlike other beliefs that have a hierarchical system, with the most powerful gods leading and demanding worship. There seems to be more of a recognition that the stories are symbolic, but this could be just my interpretation.

Overall, my estimation is these ideas and practices were lost and subjugated when Empires with more effective weapons and battle techniques took control of large areas of the map. That changed not only who was in control but how values of how best to survive were passed on. Reflecting on how much better off we are than the previous generation or our younger selves was replaced by what general could best the previous ones or what innovator could create technology to make last year’s model obsolete.

These ideas are not exclusive to Native American but I am most familiar with them. I’m sure similar ideas could be found in other parts of the world and in more philosophies. Now that we have connected the globe and have a better vision of history, including pre-written history, it is time we incorporate all that knowledge and experience into a global sense of morality. Religions that have been at war with each other for as long as they have existed now gesture and speak in platitudes of how we are all praying to the same God or that their God points to the same beliefs as the others. There is even recognition lately of moral systems that have nothing to do with Gods at all. Is it possible to bring all this together and at least talk about the common ground?

This is a bit a tangent from the main theme of how to create a moral system, but I sometimes feel Carrier spends too much time critiquing the people who call themselves moral leaders and not so much on where we could be looking for real leadership.