THE USE OF KNOWLEDGE AS A BARRIER TO GLOBAL MORAL DECLINE
Dr. Konstantina Palamiotou-Thomaidou
In our century an ideological process has now been completed that had already begun gradually to prevail from the previous one. A tragic reversal of reality has taken place: the Machiavellian lie that respect for ethical values is a sign of weakness has become predominant.
However, precisely this respect for moral discourse is the only stable field of application of immutable and diachronic values in our changing and faltering age. Worldwide today there is the perverse notion that everyone is free to act as he wants, the social order is disturbed, many social crimes are repeatedly committed, with the result that this could become more and more chaotic, and societies could find themselves in great confusion.
One of the causes, and in our opinion the fundamental one, of this confusion is the collapse of traditional values and of the forms of ethical conduct. In fact the whole history of Man is the constant effort to find the criterion for the foundation of absolute, timeless moral values
.
The philosophy of the ancient Greeks, with pioneers Socrates and Plato, attempted to base moral values on true knowledge. Following Greek philosophy in modern times, Descartes and Kant also developed axiological theories centered on Reason.
However, Neo-Kantianism dealt with values as the main issue of philosophy but completely dissociated philosophy, which, according to them, deals with values, from Science, which deals with facts. From there begins a series of problems, which reaches our days: Scientists continue to analyze "facts" totally in the absence of values.
The utilitarianism and pragmatism of the Western intellect that followed constitute materialistic approaches to values resulting in their relativization. Even worse, the Nietzschean mindset, Analytical Philosophy and Marxism are anti-value philosophies, completely opposed to traditional theories of moral values.
The traditional view of values which was based on Greek philosophy is no longer considered effective today by many. As a result, modern societies are in a great social confusion, as mentioned above.
So what must urgently be done? What can we do?
Aristotle rightly notes that human life situations are divided into «εφ ημιν» "by us" and «ουκ εφ ημιν», "not by us", i.e. those that we can control and those that we cannot. The reality in which we are born and then we live is one of the "not by us" things as it is not a product of our selection.
Our whole life unfolds within a physical world and a historical reality that limit us. Therefore we have to exercise the forms of freedom in those contexts that we can control, to decide, that is, wherever we have a choice, but, for these things at least we must not remain apathetic, indecisive, distracted.
The social reality does not consist of a mere sum of individuals, but of organized groups of persons. When we seek a participatory democratic society, automatically we seek participant democratic citizens, i.e. rational and moral personalities.
This means that we all have not only the right but the duty to participate in the organization of society. But to persons involved in the regulation of not only their personal life but also in determining the overall framework, the foremost factor in the formation of this capacity is education. Education not only in the sense of schools and general education but of "Lifelong Education" i.e. the continuous action of each society and culture over its citizens, that works constantly: from the family environment, in school and out of school, around, the neighborhood, the Church, the Army, the Media, and so on.
This indeed is Social Education in its broadest sense; the "universal education" is a necessary condition of democratic virtue. This is why the original policy must belong to the realm of ethics. Politics, as a spiritual vocation, is a form of education. The politician dealing one-dimensionally with economic interests necessarily falls into demagoguery as a "politico" and is thus removed from the concept of "teacher legislator" and leader of the people. (Besides, even the economic dimension, in the long term, depends on proper education because before any economic crisis there precedes a deeper spiritual crisis, of social and moral values, visible in time, only to the cognoscenti, whose warnings and exhortations usually are not accepted or are ignored by the masses.)
Education, certainly, is itself in crisis. An adequate theory of education, sufficient to overcome the aforementioned axiological problems of modern societies, is difficult to locate anywhere, and modern societies are «experimenting" with pedagogical standards, which however prove insufficient as statements of purpose and so their foundation is always pragmatic i.e. materialistic and utilitarian. (The tragic irony is that, ultimately, even this utilitarian statement of purpose cannot be achieved, because the wider insufficiency of such an educational system cannot, by its very constitution, have sufficient positive results.)
A partial result of this broader axiological and pedagogical failure is the crisis in teacher and learner relationships: the former have lost prestige and excitement for their office, which is conveying concentrated knowledge of the past to the younger generation as a "necessary evil"; the latter does not feel respect for the former. The schools of all levels, from primary to tertiary, have become internationally places of mere "marketing of knowledge” while the moral foundation of their educational systems exhausts itself in the shallows of "political correctness", not moving to deeper and more substantial values.
The problems, however, of Humanity go beyond these inconsequential possibilities for a proper pedagogy. The destruction of the natural environment, the contamination, the development of weapons of mass destruction, the emergence of obsessive ideologues eager for any kind of terrorist act, are urgent issues and converge in the global query: How can unilaterally developed science and technology of our time be enlisted once again in the service of Humanity?
The new humanism, that the time requires, will emerge re-baptized in the springs from which the first Humanism was enlivened, i.e. the value system of classical philosophy, empowered with the tools of modern science and technology. The "media" have been developed and continue to grow by leaps and bounds. The "objects" that they serve is the goal that should not leave anyone an indifferent and neutral scientist. In a single phrase, then, what is needed immediately to be given priority is not the acquisition of mono-dimensional knowledge but the correct use of knowledge.
Humanity needs to return to its original creativity, which is the creation by ethical means and incentives. For this, the scientists of the future should primarily be persons with principles, persons of character, and secondarily dynamic scientists.
Otherwise they constitute a potential danger to mankind (as we so tragically experienced in our days from fundamentalist terrorists who studied however at the largest universities of "civilized" Europe!). In other words,
Ethics must be the basis of all science. Only then will scientists become "leaders", each in his field, and Humanity will hope to envision a better future.
Dr.Konstantina Palamiotou-Thomaidou
PhD., Athens University, Philosophy
