Right and Wrong

Movies are a great way to listen to what we are saying to ourselves as a culture. They can also reveal the underlying assumptions we all share. I am thinking particularly about one of the best movies I have seen in recent times: The Great Debaters with Denzel Washington and Forrest Whitaker, both excellent actors at the top of their game. My purpose here is not to review the movie itself – I will leave that to others who are much better qualified. Rather, I was thinking about what it reveals about the assumptions we all share. In this case there is a sense of what constitutes right and wrong. It is hard to watch the lynch scene without getting downright angry and thinking that there really is no justification for that kind of thing, regardless of how those who did the lynching were raised or what their worldview is.

The problem is that this concept of absolute right and wrong, at least about some things – a concept I completely agree with – is at odds with another thing we have been teaching in our culture for the past fifty years or so. I am speaking of moral relativism – that some things are more or less right or wrong depending on the context. What is wrong for me might be right for you and vice versa. That this is true about some things is beyond question – a good example might be dietary practices. To be honest, I am not looking forward to eating bug! I know that there are many types of insects that are very healthful and are even reputed to be tasty. I have a feeling that this knowledge will remain theoretical on my part!

But isn’t that just the problem? When we relegate moral values to the same category as taste, then any reason to claim that something is right or wrong is nothing more than an expression of our personal taste – and that is subject to change and cannot be gainsaid. Now I know that there are those who would have us believe that morals are indeed a matter of taste which any culture is allowed to enforce. But do any of us seriously believe that? Because, when all is said and done, all we are really saying is that “might makes right;” that the majority can and even has a right to enforce their own standards. But we don’t really believe that, do we? Because it is certain that the majority in that part of Texas in the 1930s portrayed in the movie thought that they were right. Nonetheless, they weren’t.

What is the alternative? That there is someone behind all of this that we see and sense who built into the fabric of the universe in general and into you and me in particular a sure knowledge of right and wrong. But be careful – that can lead to all kinds of concepts that we might not like – like the fact that we might be answerable to that same person for our actions. That is all well and good for Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot, but you and me? Hmm….