“I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern without any superhuman authority behi

Ethics as distinct from morals in the face of objective truth

Einstein introduces an interesting argument regarding ethics, the afterlife and the existence of a supernatural being. Such weighted concepts are all constant questions in the minds of individuals, and generate powerful ideological stances on both sides. The immortality of the individual could be perceived as the existence of a human soul that is incorruptible. Ethics is the study and the implementation of what is perceived as just and good which is quite distinct from morals. The crucial point here is one of objective truth in the face of constantly changing society and its make up. There are a number of considerations here: at its most narrow, the quote addresses ethical directions that are taken; but at its broadest, one could accept that a spectrum of truths get closer to objective truth.

The transience of the human person is a fait accompli. Whether the spirit or soul persists is still a contended issue in theological circles. The existence of a soul that can be corrupted by negative thoughts, hurtful actions and the like is akin to the more tenable concept of the human character that adapts the qualities of those around them and what comes from inside. One logical consequence of the non-existence or the mortality of the human soul might be that it does not matter how we act, as there is no lasting justice. In contrast, a large group within society champions the need for ethics so that life can be well-ordered and society can enjoy relative peace. IN this light, ethics seems to be largely a human mechanism for social order. However ethics, as distinct from morals, proposes what is right and just. Morals, on the other hand, are what allow people to choose what is right or wrong, irrespective of what ethics demands. St. Paul complains to an early Christian community that he often does what is hateful to himself which highlights the divide between ethics as informed by humanity and morals which he believes to be regulated by a supernatural and omniscient being.

The question remains whether objective truth persists in the face of a changing societal makeup. That is, as new people grow and are influenced by their environment, do they still adhere to some system of truth that guides how they act and respond in spite of what society says? This is the role that tradition plays in ordering various societies across the globe. Hence, in Papua New Guinea, traditional marriage rites and tribal justice exists alongside an increasingly Westernised government and people. Tradition is the voice that is still heard among the vacillating opinions of the society and in this sense; truth remains objective without human influence. An important acknowledgement here is that ethics continues alongside moral behaviour, in a spectrum of influences that in some way persists in spite of the terminable individual.

It is clear therefore that one impact time has had on society is in elucidating the importance of tradition and objective truths in society. Whether such discussions point society to objective [I meant omniscient!] beings is a matter of discernment.