The Moral Pendulum

[EllenMaksoud]

Is there a moral pendulum? As far as I can see and have studied, I have not detected a rise and fall in morality. Perhaps we were more moral during the early 1600's here in the US?

In my own judgement, there has been a significant change in fashion from the 50's till now. However, in some cases, I do not see that I feel like I have more rights than in the 50's. I can still remember my parents insisting that I go in the house at sunset. I certainly was not allowed out with a boy they did not like. There was no girls night out where we'd all go to a bar and get hammered.

I don't think I wish to talk about what some think is the most important social issue of our day.

I think that the Mormon church is refreshingly retro grade to the late 50's and I like it. It is pleasant and makes me feel more secure.

[Questing Beast]

I don't think that your security is based on reality, then. Because I have seen quite noticeable shifts in "moral" thinking from the 50's. What you briefly mention here is cultural shift, not religious doctrine so much. Yes, morality, especially sexual morality, is more or less fixed in Mormonism. But even sexual morality has flexibility. There are lines drawn clearly that if crossed are where morality has been broken. The rest of it is parental/societal controls to avoid even approaching near to those "lines" of demarcation. "Stay away from the cliff and you won't risk a fall", sort of thinking: so girls were forbidden certain kinds of activities at certain hours, etc. That is not a moral "pendulum", it is just morphing parental controls....

[thesometimesaint]

Is there a moral pendulum? As far as I can see and have studied, I have not detected a rise and fall in morality. Perhaps we were more moral during the early 1600's here in the US?

In my own judgement, there has been a significant change in fashion from the 50's till now. However, in some cases, I do not see that I feel like I have more rights than in the 50's. I can still remember my parents insisting that I go in the house at sunset. I certainly was not allowed out with a boy they did not like. There was no girls night out where we'd all go to a bar and get hammered.

I don't think I wish to talk about what some think is the most important social issue of our day.

I think that the Mormon church is refreshingly retro grade to the late 50's and I like it. It is pleasant and makes me feel more secure.

Overall I think we are more moral now than in the 1950's. Let alone the 1600's. Extreme poverty, rampant disease, chattel slavery, religious wars, wars of extermination, general lack of education, etc., etc., etc. were the norm rather than the exception in the 1600's. Life was hard, mean, and blessedly short for the vast majority of people, even here in what was to become the US.

Here in the 1950's we had rampant racism, a woman's place was as a Joan Clever of "Leave it to Beaver" mom. Men were supposed to carry absolute monetary control over their wives and children. Your whole family failed if the husband failed at a job. We experienced Nuclear Attack warnings regularly. I remember all too well the "Duck and Cover" drills we had in school. I was 11 years old with the Cuban Missile Crises. It scared the crap out of all of us.

There is much more to morality than the length of the skirts. Interestingly it is during bad economic times that skirt lengths get longer. I'm sure I wouldn't trade good economic times just for longer skirts.

While we didn't have "girls night out" there were plenty of women whom stashed the alcohol where only they knew where to find it.

Some people might find it refreshing, but there was/is a down side to trying to live in a halcyon world that never was.

[EllenMaksoud]

Overall I think we are more moral now than in the 1950's. Let alone the 1600's. Extreme poverty, rampant disease, chattel slavery, religious wars, wars of extermination, general lack of education, etc., etc., etc. were the norm rather than the exception in the 1600's. Life was hard, mean, and blessedly short for the vast majority of people, even here in what was to become the US.

Here in the 1950's we had rampant racism, a woman's place was as a Joan Clever of "Leave it to Beaver" mom. Men were supposed to carry absolute monetary control over their wives and children. Your whole family failed if the husband failed at a job. We experienced Nuclear Attack warnings regularly. I remember all too well the "Duck and Cover" drills we had in school. I was 11 years old with the Cuban Missile Crises. It scared the crap out of all of us.

There is much more to morality than the length of the skirts. Interestingly it is during bad economic times that skirt lengths get longer. I'm sure I wouldn't trade good economic times just for longer skirts.

While we didn't have "girls night out" there were plenty of women whom stashed the alcohol where only they knew where to find it.

Some people might find it refreshing, but there was/is a down side to trying to live in a halcyon world that never was.

I remember that most of the talk about abortion, women's rights, and many other things that happen now were just not spoken of in mixed company. Mom's were supposed to stay home with their children. Mine did not because they felt that it took two incomes to support that family. Of course, my stepfather left school in the 4th grade, not by choice, and that made life very hard for him; working for the lowest wages. My parents were Easter Christians, and while there was a Bible in the house, it was seldom read.

I think the time of peak prosperity in this country was perhaps in the early 80's. I was in my early 30's and had two lovely children. Looking back, it is now easy to see that had we not been infected by the drive for affluence, I could have easily stayed home. I think that many of us were enticed by marketers to buy things we did not need.

I worry about our children now days. Gone is the prosperity that I enjoyed.

[thesometimesaint]

The 80's weren't all that great either, economically speaking. That time really started the downwards fall of the middle class. From my point of view it is never the best of times, but it is always the best of times and the worst of times.

I am forever grateful that my wife chose to work outside our home after all our kids were full day in school. We could have never afforded to stay in our home, after I became totally disabled, without her financial contribution. We now have our home mortgage paid off, and are largely out of debt. We couldn't have done it without her.

[Stone holm]

It depends on your definition of "morality". We have in a religious sense been increasingly narrowing the scope of "morality" to the sexual sphere. In the case of sexual morality, I would say that the sexual revolution which occurred beginning in the 1960's and with the increased availability of the pill has had a tremendous impact on the degree of overt promiscuity. So in that respect we have degraded. In other areas, I think we have improved massively, the trees down South no longer routinely sprout strange fruit, we refuse to tolerate many types of rude and uncivil behavior that previously were no big deal, more parents seem to be taking an interest in their childrens activities and health, many of our cities are actually safer than they were when I was a teenager. If you judge everything by things sexual, then I think you tend to see the world going to Hades in a handbasket, if you see the break of communities and focus on that then again it looks like we are going to Hades in a Walmart cart, but if you take a more global and general view I think things start looking a little more neutral. We in America right now are obsessed with things sexual -- both in seeking it and condemning it -- its like someone gave everybody including all our ministers some kind of massive hormone injection so all they can think about is sex. Don't have sex and the world will just be hunkey dorie type thinking.

[thesometimesaint]

What The Pill did was disassociate pregnancy from sex. It for the first time allowed women to easily, effectively, control the number and spacing of their children. Overall I see that as a good thing, and have no desire to go back to the times when the Mormon Church leaders declared that unless you had at least 12-14 children you were damned to Hell.

[JDave]

the times when the Mormon Church leaders declared that unless you had at least 12-14 children you were damned to Hell.

Curious as to the source on that. Or is that just a bit of hyperbole?

[thesometimesaint]

Curious as to the source on that. Or is that just a bit of hyperbole?

You'll find it in the Special Collections of the BYU library under Birth Control.

[Questing Beast]

Heehee. You guys.

I agree that sex is the main focus of teachings on morality. And sex is the great sin of Sodom and Gomorrah in such teachings, when in actuality it was far more than that and worse than sexual promiscuity in all its manifestations. Morality is more than about sex, far more related to integrity than mere casual sex. I know people who are casual about sexual play, and that is a form of honesty itself: not putting on airs about what sex means, simply admitting up front that they are playing with it, so don't get all bent over something that's here today between you and gone tomorrow. I don't agree with that kind of casualness with sex. But at least the players know what is going on. What I don't see is an huge increase in people engaging in sex that way. Sure, sex as a subject and activity is far more in the open than ever. But many people choose to remain as they prefer, not get casual about sex. And I don't see evidence that the world is getting worse, instead on the whole it appears to be getting better, i.e. more moral....

Edited May 24, 2013 by Questing Beast

[Stone holm]

Heehee. You guys.

I agree that sex is the main focus of teachings on morality. And sex is the great sin of Sodom and Gomorrah in such teachings, when in actuality it was far more than that and worse than sexual promiscuity in all its manifestations. Morality is more than about sex, far more related to integrity than mere casual sex. I know people who are casual about sexual play, and that is a form of honesty itself: not putting on airs about what sex means, simply admitting up front that they are playing with it, so don't get all bent over something that's here today between you and gone tomorrow. I don't agree with that kind of casualness with sex. But at least the players know what is going on. What I don't see is an huge increase in people engaging in sex that way. Sure, sex as a subject and activity is far more in the open than ever. But many people choose to remain as they prefer, not get casual about sex. And I don't see evidence that the world is getting worse, instead on the whole it appears to be getting better, i.e. more moral....

Wow had to give you a bump on that. Yeah am not exactly sure how we got to this state of sexual obsession except that sex sells in more ways than one and if you are commercialising religion then I guess denouncing sex and focusing on sex is the way to go. You don't see much of the 19th Century social gospel where you were decrying slavery, child labor, abuse of the poor, etc.

[RadioFreeDeath]

I think sex is just the main focus of the current challenge to morality. Looking back 40 years we saw a lot of talk about the word of wisdom, but now that the main consensus is that yeah, drugs and smoking are bad for you, that is no longer taught as stringently. Now we instead focus on the sexual morality because that is where society is wavering the most. I suspect in 20 or 30 years the moral focus in the church will shift elsewhere, who knows what the next challenge will be.

[Stone holm]

I think sex is just the main focus of the current challenge to morality. Looking back 40 years we saw a lot of talk about the word of wisdom, but now that the main consensus is that yeah, drugs and smoking are bad for you, that is no longer taught as stringently. Now we instead focus on the sexual morality because that is where society is wavering the most. I suspect in 20 or 30 years the moral focus in the church will shift elsewhere, who knows what the next challenge will be.

I think if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. So if you have limited yourself to primarily sexual morality, then everything looks like a sexual morality issue even if the world is being set ablaze by economic immorality. But that is just MNSHO.

[pmccombs1]

... Morality is more than about sex, far more related to integrity than mere casual sex. I know people who are casual about sexual play, and that is a form of honesty itself: not putting on airs about what sex means, simply admitting up front that they are playing with it, so don't get all bent over something that's here today between you and gone tomorrow. ...

Yeah, Hugh Nibley said stuff like this. People struggle with sex for a while, because it is wired into them. I am certain the world is full of those who think that sexual purity is a great ideal, yet fail to live up to it. Well, one day those urges subside, and eventually it's not such a hard thing to behave oneself. That must be a relief for those who are merely pure in heart.

Now the much worse sin--the far more grievous immorality--is to have malice. You see, because that isn't wired into anybody but is purely a defect of one's character. It is a defect of power rather than of weakness. Do you see the difference? Sexual sin is typically (though not always) a sin of weakness. People do it because they can't help themselves. Oh, sure; mostly it's their own fault for getting into those difficulties in the first place. They should know better and often do, but they sin because they are weak.

Now, anger, avarice, and hatred are sins of power. They are sins of the Will. If Man is here to discover and shape his Will--the only gift he can present to God--then to be found with malice is to be found in willful opposition to God. But to be found with weakness is only to be found wanting.

Perhaps that is why Nibley claimed that even Sodom and Gomorrah were spared until they became so greedy that they began to guard their harvests from being gleaned by the birds. And then Nibley would say that even the Harlot would pass through the gates of heaven before the businessman.

I believe that God has mercy on the weak, but heaven help the strong.

It is a curious thing that churches view the whole of morality through the lens of this weakness of the flesh. I guess the devil has been busy talking to our preachers and diverting them from the real problems. Churches create people who seek to bridle the passions of their flesh, but not the passions of the soul. God himself, through the resurrection of Christ, shall purify our flesh, but it is up to us to purify our own hearts. As it stands today, the concept of "morality" is on its head. Mention it to a good Sunday-school attending youth, and what do they think? Morality is the taboo of sex.

[Stone holm]

Yeah, Hugh Nibley said stuff like this. People struggle with sex for a while, because it is wired into them. I am certain the world is full of those who think that sexual purity is a great ideal, yet fail to live up to it. Well, one day those urges subside, and eventually it's not such a hard thing to behave oneself. That must be a relief for those who are merely pure in heart.

Now the much worse sin--the far more grievous immorality--is to have malice. You see, because that isn't wired into anybody but is purely a defect of one's character. It is a defect of power rather than of weakness. Do you see the difference? Sexual sin is typically (though not always) a sin of weakness. People do it because they can't help themselves. Oh, sure; mostly it's their own fault for getting into those difficulties in the first place. They should know better and often do, but they sin because they are weak.

Now, anger, avarice, and hatred are sins of power. They are sins of the Will. If Man is here to discover and shape his Will--the only gift he can present to God--then to be found with malice is to be found in willful opposition to God. But to be found with weakness is only to be found wanting.

Perhaps that is why Nibley claimed that even Sodom and Gomorrah were spared until they became so greedy that they began to guard their harvests from being gleaned by the birds. And then Nibley would say that even the Harlot would pass through the gates of heaven before the businessman.

I believe that God has mercy on the weak, but heaven help the strong.

It is a curious thing that churches view the whole of morality through the lens of this weakness of the flesh. I guess the devil has been busy talking to our preachers and diverting them from the real problems. Churches create people who seek to bridle the passions of their flesh, but not the passions of the soul. God himself, through the resurrection of Christ, shall purify our flesh, but it is up to us to purify our own hearts. As it stands today, the concept of "morality" is on its head. Mention it to a good Sunday-school attending youth, and what do they think? Morality is the taboo of sex.

If I am understanding you correctly, that is the same conclusion the C.S. Lewis came to with regards to anger and malice.

[The Nehor]

If I am understanding you correctly, that is the same conclusion the C.S. Lewis came to with regards to anger and malice.

Yes, he defined the drive to sex and similar appetites as falling prey to our animal natures which are not truly evil. We just lost control. Pride and hatred come from hell. It is better to be part animal rather then part devil. It is of course best to be neither,

[pmccombs1]

If I am understanding you correctly, that is the same conclusion the C.S. Lewis came to with regards to anger and malice.

Perhaps, but the only work of C.S. Lewis I know first-hand is his brief pamphlet entitled, "The Abolition of Man." That was a philosophical tract establishing the importance of subjective senses. If his views on malice are similar to mine, then I am happy to be in good company. I am certain ours is not an uncommon view to hold, however.

I believe my views on this matter to be more influenced by Adam Smith.

[Ahab]

... Nibley claimed that even Sodom and Gomorrah were spared until they became so greedy that they began to guard their harvests from being gleaned by the birds.

Uh oh. I'm building nets over our berry boxes to keep out the birds, and the deer. The deer are the worst, because they'll eat the leaves which help the plants to grow, but we don't want the birds eating our berries either, or at least not on our favorite plants. We have some other berry bushes I don't mend them eating from, wtih blackberries growing wild all around us and they're welcome to some of our huckleberries too, but we don't want them eating our strawberries or raspberries or marionberries or blueberries.

And then Nibley would say that even the Harlot would pass through the gates of heaven before the businessman.

Oh well, I guess we'll be going to Hell, or at least the businessman will go in before us.

I believe that God has mercy on the weak, but heaven help the strong.

Whew. There's my escape clause. I'm weak. Yeah, that's the ticket. I'm just weak.

[pmccombs1]

Uh oh. I'm building nets over our berry boxes to keep out the birds, and the deer. The deer are the worst, because they'll eat the leaves which help the plants to grow, but we don't want the birds eating our berries either, or at least not on our favorite plants. We have some other berry bushes I don't mend them eating from, wtih blackberries growing wild all around us and they're welcome to some of our huckleberries too, but we don't want them eating our strawberries or raspberries or marionberries or blueberries.

I sometimes think of that Nibley story every time I put wire over the produce. But then I excuse myself by saying that the fauna around here will do more than glean otherwise! But the story has its point, I suppose.

Oh well, I guess we'll be going to Hell, or at least the businessman will go in before us.

Oh, that's the spirit! Let's instead look at it in terms of who gets into Hell first.

Whew. There's my escape clause. I'm weak. Yeah, that's the ticket. I'm just weak.

Welcome to the club. We have great perks.

Edited May 24, 2013 by pmccombs1

[The Nehor]

Uh oh. I'm building nets over our berry boxes to keep out the birds, and the deer. The deer are the worst, because they'll eat the leaves which help the plants to grow, but we don't want the birds eating our berries either, or at least not on our favorite plants. We have some other berry bushes I don't mend them eating from, wtih blackberries growing wild all around us and they're welcome to some of our huckleberries too, but we don't want them eating our strawberries or raspberries or marionberries or blueberries.

I am pretty sure that is adequate. When I garden I alway leave a portion open as a kind of tribute to the animals and birds.

[why me]

Heehee. You guys.

I agree that sex is the main focus of teachings on morality. And sex is the great sin of Sodom and Gomorrah in such teachings, when in actuality it was far more than that and worse than sexual promiscuity in all its manifestations. Morality is more than about sex, far more related to integrity than mere casual sex. I know people who are casual about sexual play, and that is a form of honesty itself: not putting on airs about what sex means, simply admitting up front that they are playing with it, so don't get all bent over something that's here today between you and gone tomorrow. I don't agree with that kind of casualness with sex. But at least the players know what is going on. What I don't see is an huge increase in people engaging in sex that way. Sure, sex as a subject and activity is far more in the open than ever. But many people choose to remain as they prefer, not get casual about sex. And I don't see evidence that the world is getting worse, instead on the whole it appears to be getting better, i.e. more moral....

When it comes to sex, the impact of HIV/AIDS have been great. In the 70's people were quite loose with their sexuality. I remember New York City and he swinging clubs that existed such as studio54. There were quite a few such clubs, not to mention gay bath houses where various orgies would take place. But HIV changed all that and such clubs began to close quickly by city ordinance. And people's sexual habits also began to change. There is no question that if HIV did not come on the scene, sexual norms would be much different than they are today. Most people would have a poor moral sexual compass without the HIV scare.

[why me]

I think sex is just the main focus of the current challenge to morality. Looking back 40 years we saw a lot of talk about the word of wisdom, but now that the main consensus is that yeah, drugs and smoking are bad for you, that is no longer taught as stringently. Now we instead focus on the sexual morality because that is where society is wavering the most. I suspect in 20 or 30 years the moral focus in the church will shift elsewhere, who knows what the next challenge will be.

In the UK, there is much discussion about internet porn and its effects on children who view it. Listening to the researcher talk about it, I felt that she was listening to lds church leaders since she seemed to say just what they have been saying for quite some time. I think that porn is the big issue today and its effect on people's concept of sexuality. However, I think that the HIV scare has limited people's sexual appetites. Take away this scare or virus, and people's sexual appetites would be focused on the more the merrier.

[Stone holm]

In the UK, there is much discussion about internet porn and its effects on children who view it. Listening to the researcher talk about it, I felt that she was listening to lds church leaders since she seemed to say just what they have been saying for quite some time. I think that porn is the big issue today and its effect on people's concept of sexuality. However, I think that the HIV scare has limited people's sexual appetites. Take away this scare or virus, and people's sexual appetites would be focused on the more the merrier.

Well it has become religiously incorrect in the Church to suggest that our law of the jungle approach to economics just might have a teeny weeny bit of an influence on social ills which is why children might be watching porn on the Internet, instead of swiping their older brother's Playboy.

[Ahab]

Is there a moral pendulum?

If that refers to an indicator of what is good and evil which moves according to each person's perspective, then yes there is one. When some people think some things are good while some other people think those same things are evil, then you can say it's because of the swing in the pendulum.

As far as I can see and have studied, I have not detected a rise and fall in morality. Perhaps we were more moral during the early 1600's here in the US?

The rise or fall is not in morality but in each person's perspective of morality. What is good or evil is always good or evil, even though some people's perspective of good and evil may change.

In my own judgement, there has been a significant change in fashion from the 50's till now. However, in some cases, I do not see that I feel like I have more rights than in the 50's. I can still remember my parents insisting that I go in the house at sunset. I certainly was not allowed out with a boy they did not like. There was no girls night out where we'd all go to a bar and get hammered.

What rights are you talking about? You've always had the right to do whatever you want to do that you can do but the consequences for doing some things has changed since the 50's. That doesn't mean that whether something is good or evil has changed since then, though.

I don't think I wish to talk about what some think is the most important social issue of our day.

Homosexuality? Neh, me either.

I think that the Mormon church is refreshingly retro grade to the late 50's and I like it. It is pleasant and makes me feel more secure.

I think I know what you mean and I'm more into things that are considered to be old fashioned too.

[why me]

Well it has become religiously incorrect in the Church to suggest that our law of the jungle approach to economics just might have a teeny weeny bit of an influence on social ills which is why children might be watching porn on the Internet, instead of swiping their older brother's Playboy.

I think that you are looking at it all from an US perspective. In the UK, members vote for Labour, Tory, or Liberal Democratic etc. In the rest of europe, members vote socialist, liberal, conservative or green etc. However, yes, in the US members do seem to vote conservative. I don't think that the church is procapitalist since there are warnings against debt and spending more than is necessary. That being said, all those who support any form of capitalism may be choosing a system that puts profit before people.