death and rebirth

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

from "The Madman", by Friedrich Nietzsche

The death of God is a way of saying that humans are no longer able to believe in any such cosmic order since they themselves no longer recognize it. The death of God will lead, Nietzsche says, not only to the rejection of a belief of cosmic or physical order but also to a rejection of absolute values themselves — to the rejection of belief in an objective and universal moral law, binding upon all individuals. In this manner, the loss of an absolute basis for morality leads to nihilism. This nihilism is what Nietzsche worked to find a solution for by re-evaluating the foundations of human values. This meant, to Nietzsche, looking for foundations that went deeper than Christian values. He would find a basis in the "will to power" that he described as "the essence of reality".

from Wikipedia commentary on the phrase "God is dead"

Though an admitted fan of existentialism, I'd never read any of this until Sunday, when I was surfing the net aimlessly as I often do when I'm not otherwise occupied (which is, like, never). The quote and commentary struck me as somewhat entertaining. Nietzsche and I have apparently come to the exact same conclusion. Perhaps we're both super-smart. Perhaps we're complete idiots.

If one rejects religion, where does their moral/ethical foundation come from? And what should the basis of their morals and ethics be? Is there value in a non-absolutist approach to morals and ethics? I've been thinking about these questions for years, since long before I ever announced a change in beliefs or religious affiliation to anyone.

A portion of my business ethics term paper was supposed to be devoted to a discussion of my own ethical/moral foundations, so I explored the questions I posed above in that paper. Ultimately, I didn't have any easy answers, but declared myself a relativist in some ways, and an absolutist in others. For example, I believe that it may be morally/ethically acceptable to withhold information from people in certain instances. Much of my job is facilitated by the restriction and filtration of information. I don't lie, but I also don't tell people everything because I've seen what happens when maximum transparency is offered to my customers. Jack Nicholson once exclaimed "You can't handle the truth!" in A Few Good Men; I'd do the same if I could gather all my customers in a room at the same time.

Absolutism seems to be the Judeo-Christian way, at least, at face value. I've largely rejected absolutism in my life because this point of view fails to take into account the myriad contingencies that will be found in a situation. There are some situations, however, where absolutism is acceptable and may even be the only viable basis for judging a course of action. For example, I accept as a maxim the idea that bribes should not be accepted under any circumstances. Giving them, however, is a potentially different matter (maybe I'll get into that some other time). Working against one's employer for one's own personal gain is also not acceptable under any circumstances. There are other big questions, however, where the value of absolutism must be questioned. Take, for example, killing. Killing in war is generally considered acceptable; murder, however, is not. And what about capital punishment for a crime? When is it acceptable and when is it not? If you ask me, it would be generally acceptable if it served as a viable deterrent to crime, but studies show that it doesn't. It doesn't serve the greater good (here's the utilitarian in me speaking), so I deem it to be of little value to society or to the punished.

Reassessing one's ethical/moral foundations is much like falling off a cliff into darkness--there's no telling where the bottom is or what I'll find down there. Somehow, though, I believe the light will shine just as brightly as it does on the ground, if not brighter.