Why Moral Values Are Disappearing
By DONALD DeMARCO
Benjamin Franklin, among his numerous contributions to civilization, bequeathed to the world a stream of deathless aphorisms: A penny saved is a penny earned; time lost is never found again; nothing is certain save death and taxes; there was never a good war, or a bad peace; honesty is the best policy. And if so many of his aphorisms are nothing but platitudes, he redeems himself by stating, “Be at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let every New Year find you a better man.”
My favorite of his timeless proverbs, for purely philosophical reasons, is his statement that there is “A place for everything, everything in its place.” It is a practical bromide indicating that everything should be stored someplace and when not in use should be returned to its proper place. I put my socks in a particular drawer and put them back in that same drawer when they return from the laundry. This simplifies life and enables us to know where things are when we want to use them. Without such order, life would quickly degenerate into chaos: “Where are my socks? Must I go to work barefooted?”
Misplacing our car keys or credit card can be calamitous. Misplacement is a sin against order. Nonetheless, the missing items must be somewhere, even if they are not in the right place. We must engage in a search to relocate them.
All this is nothing but common sense, and the author of Poor Richard’s Almanack was, indeed, a man of uncommon common sense. However, this practical bromide does not work for philosophy. If we misplace an idea, a strange thing happens — it disappears. A more profound aphorism, an axiom, rather, is that it belongs to the wise man to order (Sapientis est ordinare).
This ordering has a specific and time-honored meaning. It refers to putting philosophical ideas or values in their proper ordering. God comes first and His creatures come second. When we place the creature ahead of God, we can no longer find God — He disappears.
We know that in getting dressed, we must put our socks on before we don our shoes. The contrary, if it could be carried out, would be preposterous. This is a wonderfully philosophical word, for it means that if we put first (pre-) what should be second (posterius), we have done something foolish, or preposterous. It is preposterous, then, to put God ahead of man.
The sanctity of life should precede how we respond to life. It should come first. Now, if we place convenience before the sanctity of life, we run the danger of losing sight of the sanctity of life. When the proper order is breached, what should be primary disappears.
The abortion issue, for example, is a question of order. To the pro-abortionist, who places convenience or some other secondary factor first, he becomes an agnostic, so to speak, with regard to the sanctity of life. Since it has disappeared from his plane of thought, he believes that it does not exist. Therefore, he maintains that pro-life people believe in something that does not exist. Under such circumstances, a debate is not possible. If unicorns do not exist, there is no reason to discuss them as if they did exist.
In his discussion on the “sanctity of life” (Foreign Policy, September/October 2015), bioethicist Peter Singer has this to say:
“During the next 35 years, the traditional view of the sanctity of human life will collapse under pressure from scientific, technological, and demographic developments. By 2040, it may be that only a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists will defend the view that every human life, from conception to death, is sacrosanct.”
Nothing could be clearer. For Professor Singer, once the sanctity of life has lost its primacy, it simply vanishes. Its lingering adherents, then, must be regarded as old fogies or fools. Debate is not possible.
Concerning marriage, to take another example: The unbreakable knot of love and an openness to children comes first. Everything else in its proper ordering comes after that. But if marriage is considered a mere practical arrangement that serves the practical interests of the spouses, the pre-eminence of love and openness to procreation is in danger of disappearing. Once it disappears, it cannot be relocated and its supporters appear to be atavistic or even ridiculous.
We should look before we leap, think before we act, discern before we choose, and disregard the Nike commercial that tells us, “Just do it.” In the grand order of things, the spiritual must precede the material. There is no clearer violation of this principle than during the Christmas season when commercialism so often eclipses the spiritual significance of the Nativity.
Politicians promise material progress and are silent about spiritual values. “Nothing will ever be reformed in this age or country,” wrote G.K. Chesterton, “unless we realize that the moral fact comes first.” When the material order takes precedence, the spiritual order vanishes and is nowhere to be found.
A moral value must be assigned to its proper place so that we can know where it is in relation to the proper place of other moral values. Thus, truth must be placed before justice. Without this progression, truth disappears and justice is downgraded into license. Similarly, justice must precede mercy, otherwise mercy is nothing more than a sentimental indulgence.
Philosophy insists that each value be given its proper place so that the sequence of order with regard to other values corresponds to the wisdom of the wise man. The contrary proves disastrous: Moral values disappear and we are left with a disorder that puts our own lives in disorder.
+ + +
(Dr. Donald DeMarco is professor emeritus of St. Jerome’s University and adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College. He is a regular columnist for St. Austin Review. His latest two books, How to Navigate Through Life and Apostles of the Culture of Life, are posted on amazon.com. 12 Values of Paramount Importance is in process.)