“The arc of the moral
universe is long, but it leans towards justice.”
― Martin Luther King
Jr.
Through
my scientific course material, I have reached the conclusion that the Natural World,
or all living and non-living things besides humankind, are essentially
morally-neutral. The phenomena of homeostasis within an organism,
self-sustaining ecosystems complete with decomposition and fertilization, and natural
selection are all evidence that the Natural World maintains itself in true-neutral
fashion. There is no partiality, nor is there evidence for consciousness rivaling humankind (there is more and
more evidence that consciousness is a spectrum that reaches far down into the
animal kingdom, but this is beside my point).
Humans,
however, are most certainly conscious, and to varying degrees, maintain
first-person perspectives. This allows us limited agency (I prefer this term
over free will). There is potential for destruction (namely negative
interference with the Natural World) and potential for construction (like repairing
the negative interferences of the past). Additionally, a Biblical worldview
suggests that we are to be stewards of the earth and of all living things, and Christians
must decide what that entails. There are disagreements, such as whether burning
fossil fuels is included in our call to stewardship. Given all of this, human
activity is a wild card.
Despite this ambiguity, Dr. King asserts that what
emerges out of human activity is a “moral arc”, and that arc has a
predisposition for justice. And given what we know about human agency, this
would appear, if nothing more, entirely possible. True, it is an introspective and
extrapolative claim, but so is any claim about human nature. Dr. King focuses on a
feeling inside himself which informs his place in the moral universe, and he
also utilizes his first-person perspective to amalgamate his experiences with
others, generating a “moral arc” from his perspective. Of course, I’m doubtful
that Dr. King or anyone else consciously performs these introspections or
consciously assembles “moral arcs”. On the contrary, I think humans can’t help
doing it. It is part of our nature. Perhaps it
falls outside our limited agency. Yet the fact remains that humans have
moral agency, and thus contribute to a moral arc, one which Dr. King suggests
has a curve.
As for the veracity of Dr. King’s
statement, I know it is held in high regard by many in this office, the
Service-Learning Center. What is my opinion? I would take Dr. King’s words a step
further. I believe that every day has
a moral arc. From the first break of dawn to the last light turned out, humans
are going about their everyday business, exerting control over what they can in
their limited agency, and pressing up against the barrier beyond which humans have
no control. It is a humbling experience, being a human, and more importantly,
each day is strangely new. This flies in the face of the cliché that each day
is a blank canvas. On the contrary, we wake up each day to a world that’s a
mess. We create this mess each morning as we walk out the door. Each day starts
with an infinite number of goals and possibilities, and at the end of the day
we have accomplished a finite number of them, usually a poor reflection of our
original intent. And yet I, and perhaps others, feel like the world leaned ever
so slightly towards a conclusion – towards a whisper of a resolution, a
revolution. Perhaps Charles Darwin could get on board:
“Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death . . . the production of the higher animals directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”
― Charles Darwin
-Johnson Cochran
No comments:
Post a Comment