How Just are Traditions?

In his The Fundamentals of Ethics, Russ Shafer-Landau discusses morality through the fascinating and intangible, or well, less tangible science of philosophy. The introductory chapter briefly touches on the contents of the book, breaking it down into three sections: value theory, normative ethics, and metaethics. Throughout the introduction he continues to note skepticisms about morality and addresses common “moral” misconceptions like the existence of ethics from an atheist’s perspective, when there’s no God to enforce the rules. Shafer-Landau suggests (but doesn’t actually prove) that morality is inborn and that there is a moral absolute in ethics.
While morality is objective, differing from the cold, hard facts of biological sciences, it is still based in truth and fact and should not be considered a “rationaliz[ation of]… our gut feelings”(5).

The most intriguing point that Shafer-Landau presents, however, is a list of constraints that shape our morals. Among them he lists, “Neither the law nor tradition is immune from moral criticism”, “Everyone is morally fallible”, “We are not obligated to do the impossible”,  “Children bear less moral responsibility than adults”, and “Self-interest isn’t the only ethical consideration” (6). While these examples are not the entirety of the list that Shafer-Landau created, they are all statements that evoke critical thinking and require the reader to think twice.

 As a reader new to philosophy, I took particular interest in the idea that norms can be challenged. For example, just because a cultural or familial tradition has been long practiced, that does not mean it’s moral or right. That doesn’t make it bad, but instead, just the way it is. Specifically, consider the establishment of annual recruitment practices amongst Greek fraternities and sororities across the country: “rush” has been practiced in these organizations for nearly two centuries and more modernly anti-hazing practices have been established to protect new members. Some of these practices include covering all pictures of members of the opposite sex, including family members, and removing all traces of any religious or political affiliation to make potential new members feel as comfortable as possible during rush. One could say that requiring a member to abide by these rules is unjust because it is an infringement on her first amendment rights, the freedom of expression. But even if these rules or customs are morally corrupt, they still exist for a purpose and will continue to exist regardless of ethical standing.