Are we discussing tobiko, or flayed fish?

To start, I refer my children back to the introduction to a previous post on the topic. This has become a whole thread, you can tell by the photos of letters flying through the air.

In response to Von’s piece,

The Source of Sushi

I write here today to do something I rarely do, rarely not meaning on occasion, but meaning “almost never.” I am here to say I believe I am mistaken, and you are correct. I mean I am totally off, not you have some good points and so do I. I am not going to re-hash every argument, instead I am going to try to explain my thought process to get here, while inviting you to engage with it.

I recently had a long conversation with an old friend, B, who reminded me of a an old debate we used to have: “Morals” vs “Ethics”. I came down hard on the side of ethics. As he reminded me, I tended to describe ethics as something along the lines of “Moral actions determined by innate principles.” I used to, many lives ago (or in this case, a decade and a half ago, plus some kids and life experience), define morals as “an external set of rules and judgments that have no logic but are accepted prima facie as correct.” (At this point, I would like to note, he has not read a word of this, he had no idea about my Substack, but he rehashed this debate, because of course he would; I have great friends).

My life has changed a lot since those evening discussions, as has his. I have children. He recently got married. Things have changed. Apparently my word choices are one of those things.

I have spent weeks pondering the source of morality. I mean these terms literally… Weeks.. Pondering… Morality… Source…

It finally hit me, I am not discussing the same thing as you are.

This seems important; “we” are not talking past “each other” but I am speaking a foreign language.

I stand by every argument I made, on living well, treating with respect, and having an innate sense of right and wrong. I believe all of that, or I would not have argued it. But at this point, Von, I suspect you may be going, “Exactly” in an exasperated voice in your head, and/or banging your head against a brick edifice.

Morality is deeper (something I missed earlier in life) than right and wrong. I want to believe in it, but am unsure how to dive in. I have been speaking to a sense of right and wrong, but cannot anchor that. I do trust that there is an innate sense of this, but cannot tie it into something deeper. I would love to believe that there is some cosmic sense of right and wrong, with a way to judge that, but how? God is the most likely response.

Here is where it gets complicated!

I do not believe in God (Let us define God. God, in this sense, is an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being) and yet, I recognize that there is something deeper binding us. God may be real, and I do not argue He does not exist, I merely do not have some deep, abiding faith or hope that He does.

I have dug deep, and I do not mean “thought for two hours” deep, but gone to the core. I believe in right and wrong, and yet, human disapproval seems insignificant. I am unsure how to square that round peg.

I dislike behaviors, but articulating why is nigh impossible, without an underlying assumption. I can argue logically why they are not good, how they negatively impact the actor, or those around them, and the reasons for the “rules”.

And yet I call this morality, forgetting my earlier stance, and plenty of what I read and pondered. In my defense, the forgetting should not be shocking to me, these discussions usually happened under the influence of something, between 10pm and 4am. College was an interesting time, and when B and I used to get together after college, it was normally a night of escapism to rehash our old arguments.

Let us get to the obvious first. I have argued a stance that 15 years ago I would have scoffed at. Ethics and morality are separate, I knew this at 22, how did I forget at 36? I suspect it is two fold; time, and a lot of the explanations for moral behavior that I failed to see have become clear.

An example…

Ethics tells one not to cheat, it harms your partners, and probably causes you to lie.

Morals tells you not to fornicate, no explanation needed.

Now that I can give a clear reasoning for why not to fornicate, I assumed I had found morality. Yet this falls short. I can explain, ethically, why not to fornicate: your future children may be harmed, unwittingly spreading diseases to partners, emotional damage, and the potential to lie, use and discard come to mind.

I have to come back to the core, which was, “external set of rules and judgments that have no logic but are accepted prima facie as correct.”

Another example…

I have no argument against homosexuality. Ethically, as long as it is consenting, I see no reason to object.

I accept that plenty of people find it immoral, and I reject that… But that is because I am rejecting a moral argument on it. If God says it is wrong, I have no argument to that. I can debate the gravity of the sin, or the interpretation of the scripture leading people to believe that; but, at the core, I cannot refute that an external, omniscient being may have dictated it to be wrong.

So, where to go? I want to believe in an all encompassing right and wrong, and yet, I reject some commonly held views of this (i.e. homosexuality being inherently wrong. I recognize it can be done in a way that I view as wrong, but at the core, I do not see it.) I do not believe in God, while also recognizing there is probably something, and acknowledging it could be God in the standard sense. I also cannot figure out, if the answer for morality is God, how to even manage that. The Old Testament is littered with rules that almost no one but orthodox Jews accept (mixing fabrics, shell fish, cleansing rituals) which makes, to me, any attempt to suss out morality nigh impossible.

And here, Von, is where I turn it over to you; first, with an apology. This response took me far too long. I am sure you are wondering why, especially given how short it is. The answer is because I have actually gone back and re-hashed a lot, calling some old friends to discuss, as well as trying to really make sure the words I wrote are what I wanted to say. In addition, life has been fairly chaotic, so time to reflect has been at a minimal. For that, I am sorry, my next response will not take this long.

Second, I am truly curious as to your thoughts, first, on this new position, as well as thoughts on the difficult position laid out.

I hope you and the family are well. Mine are, after some patches. Happy New Year, and I look forward to your response.

All the Best,
Someone looking forward to this

TL;dr

Per Von

”Creating a moral system without an objective external source is impossible. All that could be created were subjective moral ‘feelings’.

P.S.

Thank you to B for the phone call before Christmas, I enjoyed it. I suspect you have been reading since we chatted, since this came up.

P.S.S.
For any sad soul who does not get my title, tobiko and flayed fish are both types of sushi, but very different. Go try sushi, you will thank yourself.