In the West, the idea of rules and following traditions are ideas set by society to control us and to kill off individuality. Many liberal minds believe that those who follow these rules are what have been labeled as “conformists” and are often looked down upon as conservative, which seems to have taken on a negative context in the West. Why is it that our ideas of freedom and morality differ so much?
The point of this article is not to commend one or denote another, but rather to provide some interesting insight into a complex topic.
When we look at highly religious groups or religions with strict rules, the Western eye may be confused about how people can abide by such rules as women being required to cover their hair or being forbidden from casual intercourse. We often see these rules as oppressing and a type of confinement designed to “put down” certain members of society, especially women. What I have found is that people from the West often think that those who follow these rules, especially women, are forced to do so. But, have we ever thought about what these same people think about the Western ways of self-autonomy? From my experience, it is not seen in a very positive light.
The Westerner may ask why people in these groups continue following these rules that do not allow them “freedom.” What they fail to understand is that these “constraints,” as we call them, are not limiting freedom in the eyes of those who follow them and, instead, they are uplifted by them. Uplifted? How is that possible? How is it possible to be uplifted when your behavior is required to match a set of social rules and laws that, to a Westerner, seem almost humiliating and oppressing? The answer to that is that, in most traditional and religious cultures, different moral codes are followed and honored than those in the West. This also serves as an answer to why, according to traditional cultures, Westerners “don't seem to care” about propriety or dignity. There are three types of morality: ethics of autonomy, ethics of divinity, and ethics of community.
Ethics of Divinity
First of all, what is divinity? If we look across most major, and even smaller religions, we find similar types of rules that seem to aim to separate the “clean” from the “dirty.” Divinity is the idea that human beings are not animals and have a “higher” self closer to that of God and, behaving immorally, brings you down to the animalistic level. Many rules pertain to cleanliness, honesty, and good deeds. For example, wearing shoes in the home is, in most parts of the world, an unthinkable act which “taints” the sanctity of the home by making it dirty. In mosques and temples, one is required to remove their shoes before entering to maintain the “purity” of the temple and not dirty it with profanity. The same idea is applied to humans who should maintain purity in order to be more God-like, thus being the highest version of themselves - uplifted, if you will. This is what is called the ethic of divinity. It is a code of morals in line with maintaining elevation above the profane and working to be “higher.” Propriety, dignity, honor, and good character are paramount and working towards this elevated state is in line with their belief in a God or something higher, the 3rd dimension. Common virtues perpetuate everyday life and are upheld by the common people.
Ethics of Autonomy
In the West, people tend to live in line with the ethic of autonomy. The ethic of autonomy is a moral code concerned with self-regulation and the empowerment to make decisions for their own lives as long as they don’t hurt anyone else or take away others rights. When you live in, or visit the West, your behavior is only confined by this one rule - not to infringe on the rights of others. Other than that, you are welcome to do as you please. If you do not think that is true and you believe that life in the West is still “limited,” I welcome you to spend some time in a collectivist culture, one that lives according to upholding honor, which you could find by taking a trip to a variety of different regions such as Asia, the Middle East, South America, etc. The ethic of autonomy is, essentially, a two-dimensional world where the 3rd dimension, the elevation, does not exist in daily life. From the point of view of many from cultures who live according to the ethic of divinity, the autonomous way of life is, in a word, degrading.
(There is a difference between doctrine and virtue/divinity. Religion started on elevation and remaining virtuous.)
Where has Character gone in the West?
In the West, the term “personality” has replaced “character” and people strive to express their personalities verbally, visually, or artistically. In collectivist cultures, people do not talk about themselves very much or their personalities. If you ask someone what their personality is, they might be confused or say they don’t know. Focus is on dignity rather than the self, based on common good character and morals which is similar to how it was in the west a little over half a century ago.
Pressure on Both Sides
This is not to say that there are not people who are forced to follow doctrines and moral codes they do not agree with. In the same breath however, we can say that, in the West, there are also people who are coerced or forced into behaving “immorally,” for lack of a better word, and may find themselves crushed by the shame of the behavior they have partaken in. Peer pressure to do drugs and have sex, twerk in clubs and grind on others is a real thing. The latter being something I have personally experienced and seen that, if refused, the person is often labeled as a “prude,” a negative thing in Western culture because “prudeness” seems to be correlated with a lack of freedom in the eyes of the westerner rather than as an expression of values.
Final Note
While the dichotomy of the morality of the East and West was something I had observed through my travels, it was something I was unable to explain or put into words until I stumbled across the book “The Happiness Hypothesis” by Jonathan Haidt. I highly recommend reading this book as it gives tremendous insight into the ethics of morality and self-righteousness.
This article barely scratches the surface of a very layered topic, so if you are interested please let me know and share your thoughts. Do you think personal freedom trumps upholding “good” character?
Great Read! love your position and look on it.