Moral Event Horizon

[danieldwilliam]

There is a phrase of Iain M Banks of which I am becoming increasingly fond. He often talks of the moral event horizon but I’ve never seen him define the term.

 I’ve been thinking about this, this morning, in the context of if and how one chooses to engage in political activity within or without a system that is flawed (and perhaps deliberately so).

 For me the moral event horizon is where you reach a situation where it is impossible to act morally, where all the available means are to some extent immoral. A little deeper in and there is the situation where all of the ends are to some extent immoral.

  How would you define the moral event horizon?

 I’d be interested to hear anyone’s views.

Comments

[dpolicar]

Well, what defines an event horizon is the threshold past which you can no longer return to the other side.

But the thing to remember about event horizons is that nothing particularly interesting necessarily happens at them.

Sure, if I'm watching something cross an event horizon it's a big deal, a point past which the object can no longer return to me, but that's a fact about the object's relationship to me. If I'm the one crossing the event horizon, nothing necessarily changes... it's just more space-time. Of course, it's highly curved spacetime. But it's not like I live in entirely flat spacetime to begin with; curved spacetime is what I'm accustomed to. It's a matter of degree.

And I guess I feel the same way about "moral event horizons".

Sure, there comes a point past which where there's no returning to the moral landscape I was previously acquainted with; there comes a point where from the perspective of an observer in that landscape I have become irretrievably immoral. But their perspective isn't necessarily a special one. (Of course, neither is mine.)

Maybe I grew up believing that morality is defined by social approval and the most important thing is to be a cooperative member of society... and then gradually I come to believe that some aspects of my society are moral to oppose, and I gradually grow more and more distant from that perspective, and eventually there's no getting back to it.

Maybe I grew up believing that morality is defined by God's will and the most important thing is to be an obedient worshipper of God... and then gradually I come to change my understanding of God and grow increasingly alienated from that perspective, until eventually there's no getting back to it.

Maybe I grew up believing that moral behavior is defined by treating other people as though they were agents with moral weight equivalent to my own... and then gradually I become a sociopath and grow increasingly disdainful of that perspective, until eventually there's no getting back to it.

In all three of those cases I have crossed a "moral event horizon"; there is no getting back to the moral landscape I started out with. But there are also important differences, both between those cases and among instances of each case.

[psychochicken.livejournal.com]

Very interesting. I think I agree with this. For me it's when you have come to a realisation that a choice/decision/action you take based on a moral belief actually reshapes your ideas on some other things. Morals and beliefs are pretty abstract things - this is where they become real, in that they shape your worldview and actions.

Not half as erudite as the above but I think we're on the same page.