When I was younger, I saw a cute stuffed animal in a store that I wanted. I knew that my parents would not buy it for me, and no one was watching. At that moment, I thought of stealing it. No one would know, and I would be able to enjoy the fruits of my labor. It was not very expensive, so I figured I would not be harming the store owner(s) in a big way. In the end, I did not go through with it due to my morals and beliefs about what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong.’

In this case, it was obvious that stealing would be wrong and selfish. However, as I grew older and began to hear other perspectives on morality, I started to question what actually is right and wrong. At times, it seems that there was no clear answer at all. 

Everyone ranks their values differently, and depending on the situation those values can also change. So, how were morals developed in the first place? Are they innate, or are they developed throughout one’s life experiences? Can anyone justify feelings of moral superiority?  These thought-provoking questions led me to dive deeper down the rabbit hole of morality.

Background of Morality

According to Seven Pillars Institute, “the first people to theorize on the relativism of ethics were the Sophists” who believed that justice was an advantage of the strong. They believed that everyone is naturally selfish and places his or her own interests above everyone else’s. Philosophies, like that of the Sophists and later the Skeptics, considered justice to be simply a matter of following the rules/laws set in place. The importance of reason was strongly emphasized at this time. Famous philosophers seemed to similarly believe this to be the case, although they placed more emphasis on each of their own beliefs. The article further expands with quotes from a few of the most famous philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Socrates believed “Knowledge is the key. Knowledge helps us to live correctly and to live the good life.” Plato claimed “Justice is harmony between the three different (reason, emotion, appetitive) parts of our souls, with reason ruling. Being Just is in our own self-interest.” Finally, Aristotle’s idea was that “The purpose of human life is eudaimonia (human flourishing, happiness). To achieve eudaimonia one must be virtuous. Ethics is an inexact science.” So who was right? In reality, all of them were correct, or at least in terms of their own individual ethical values.

How Morals Are Developed 

According to Lumen learning, Kohlberg proposes six stages of moral development, grouped into three levels. Individuals experience the stages universally and in sequence as they form beliefs about justice. 

The first level is titled the Preconventional Level which generally includes the preschool period of life. This level includes Stage 1: obedience and punishment. In this stage, the definition of what is “good” is an action that is rewarded and not punished. Because the child is still young and relatively self-centered at this time, keeping out of trouble by authorities is as far as morals go for them. 

In Stage 2: Market Exchange, an action that is agreeable to the child and child’s partner is considered morally correct. At this stage, the child learns to produce positive responses by trading favors or objects with others. For the first time, a level of fairness is introduced. However, the child still ignores the impact the trade could have on others not involved in such a trade (although at this age, a lot of exchanges are relatively innocent). 

The next level is titled the Conventional Level and occurs within the school years. Stage 3: Peer opinion considers an action that wins approval from friends or peers to be correct, whereas in Stage 4: Law and Order, an action that conforms to the community customs or laws fits the definition of good morals. In stage 3, the child attempts to conform to peer pressure and behave like his/her peers. In stage 4, the child’s thinking expands to include moral beliefs that most people would agree with, such as the idea that murder is bad. 

The final Postconventional Level (occurs when someone becomes able to think abstractly) includes Stage 5: Social contract and Stage 6: Universal Principles. In stage 5, an action that follows socially accepted ways of making decisions is the top priority. Ethical beliefs shift from acceptance of what the community believes to the process by which the beliefs are created. If the process includes ethical and respectful treatment and thinking from others’ perspectives, it can be considered morally good. On the other hand, in stage 6, an action that is consistent with self-chosen, general principles ranks highest. It is here that the realization that ethical means can still lead to unethical ends. This final stage includes the person’s individual beliefs combined with the larger community and/or society. 

It can be said that each stage has the capacity to include bits and pieces of previous stages. For example, even if one is in the final stage, following the laws would still occur occasionally to avoid punishments (going back to Stage 1) even if one’s own morals do not align with the rules. 

 This general model is broad, meaning that the ages and exact descriptions of each stage or level may not line up with every person. Nevertheless, each individual grows to develop their own morality based on internal factors (i.e. moral intuition, feelings of guilt and shame, etc.) and external factors (i.e. religion, culture, family values, etc.).

Personal Values & Morality Judgement

In terms of my personal values when it comes to morality, I’m certain that I differ from others, just like any single person would differ from any other person. As an American, I enjoy the freedom of speech and religion, among other things. Morally, I believe everyone should have those freedoms. I am Asian, and my culture places emphasis on hard work and dedication. My moral values align with this aspect of my identity, as evidenced by the fact that I value a good GPA over something someone else might prioritize, such as sports. Christianity, my religion, guides my moral judgement through the Bible. All of these personal values make me who I am. 

When asking any individual whether they believe they are more moral than average, the answer would most likely be yes. Why is this? According to Scientific American, “when comparing ourselves versus other people, we tend to rate ourselves more highly on a host of positive measures, including intelligence, ambition, friendliness, and modesty.” The self-enhancement effect explains why we are so stubborn in arguments and our own opinions. However, it is rational that we think and behave in this manner because we know ourselves better than anyone else. The positive side of this is that we are more skeptical of others’ intentions and therefore, more aware of our surroundings and protective of our well-being. On the flip side, self-perceptions of moral superiority may aid us in justifying our wrongdoings by rationalizing that we are generally “better” than others and can therefore afford to make a mistake or two here and there. 

This brings about the question: Are you more moral than most people you know? According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “the term ‘morality’ can be used either: 

1. descriptively to refer to certain codes of conduct put forward by a society or a group (such as a religion), or accepted by an individual for her own behavior

or 

2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational people.” 

The first half of the first definition seems to state that rule followers within a group are moral, whereas the second half of the first definition seems to state that morality is subjective and anyone can justify what would be considered morally incorrect by general society if it follows his or her own moral code. The second definition is also left up to interpretation. Who is considered rational? Does one simply have to be free of any mental disabilities in order to be considered rational or could rational refer to someone who behaves according to societal norms? 

In short, morality is difficult to pinpoint and it definitely varies from person to person. So then, should we strive to be more moral? The simple answer is, yes. However, the issue with that involves the second half of the first definition. If someone considers murder to be perfectly ethical and morally correct, should we encourage that person to murder? Of course not. In context of the second definition, the person wanting to commit murder would be considered “irrational” and therefore would not be morally justified to do such a thing. In the end, striving to be more moral, in terms of the integration of both definitions, would be admirable. When only considering part of one or only one definition instead of both, striving to be more moral may not be the right move depending on the ideals one is following.

Be More Understanding

In regards to judging others' morality, the answer is not that an individual is more or less moral, the answer is that we need to be more understanding of that individual's values. According to USA Today, “we ultimately diverge on so many moral issues… because we rank our values differently.” Morals differ greatly based on religion, culture, ethnicity, race, nationality, gender, etc. What one person considers moral could be a huge moral sin for another. Or, more realistically, what one person considers very moral could be only slightly moral for another person. For instance, donating money to a homeless person may seem like a huge boost in morality to one person who is making minimum wage and working overtime. On the other hand, donating the same amount of money or even more may seem like barely anything to a billionaire. Keith Kelley from Medium states that “judging others implies that the one judging is privy to the standards of good or bad or is in some way superior to another, in one’s own characteristics or ethical or moral behavior” which, no matter how you look at it, is false. Everyone judges everyone else, implying that everyone is morally superior, which does not make sense. When we judge others based on our own specific definition of what morality means, we are assuming they are “good” or “bad” even though the opposite case may be true depending on that person’s beliefs. Therefore, judging other people’s morals is contrary to our own interests (assuming that our goal is to become more moral or stay at a certain acceptable level of morality). In the end, can any one person really justify his/her beliefs or morals as better than someone else’s? Probably not, considering most people do believe that their moral value ranking is “correct” and therefore everyone else’s is at least a little bit off from their point of view. 

Closing

In the context of morality’s fluid definition(s), no one can be considered more moral than another person. There is no way to tell if you are more moral than someone else, simply because your moral values and rankings differ from that individual. In conclusion, regardless of what your set of morals are and how you rank them, be more understanding. Don’t judge others based on their actions or words when it comes to a conflicting morality issue. You can’t assume that you are fit to judge the person unless you have the same thought process and have truly been through all of the same experiences as that person, which is essentially out of the question. Try to think of any situation that might make you change or bend your own morals, and apply it to the other person. That’s what a truly moral person would do. 

Works Cited

Dastagir, Alia E. “Are You a Good Person? Morality Experts Say This Is How to Find Out.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 21 Dec. 2018, www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/12/26/you-good-person/967459001.

Gert, Bernard, and Joshua Gert. “The Definition of Morality.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 8 Sept. 2020, plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/.

Kelley, Keith. “Everyday Morality - Judging Others - Wrong and Contrary to Our Interests.” Medium, Medium, 8 Nov. 2018, medium.com/@kkelley1951/everyday-morality-judging-others-wrong-and-contrary-to-our-interests-bdc8a315769a.

May, Cindi. “Most People Consider Themselves to Be Morally Superior.” Scientific American, Scientific American, 31 Jan. 2017, www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-people-consider-themselves-to-be-morally-superior/.

“Moral Philosophy.” Ethics Unwrapped, 25 Jan. 2021, ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/moral-philosophy#:~:text=Moral%20philosophy%20is%20the%20branch,Moral%20philosophy%20has%20three%20branches.

“Early Roots of the Western Moral Tradition.” Sevenpillarsinstitute.org, sevenpillarsinstitute.org/ethics-101/early-roots-of-the-western-moral-tradition/. 

Sutton, Kelvin Seifert and Rosemary. “Educational Psychology.” Lumen, courses.lumenlearning.com/educationalpsychology/chapter/moral-development-forming-a-sense-of-rights-and-responsibilities/.