For many people, our morals–knowing what is right and what is wrong–were given to us without our consent. Think of it. When you walk in the street and see people acting in a certain way that you deem to be “wrong,” where did this whole notion of a “wrong” action come from? These morals can change gradually over the years within one society–American society become more liberal in their clothing–or can change drastically from the context of one society to another. Nietzsche wrote about this moral relativism in his book, On the Genealogy of Morality. For example, Gandhi went to South Africa and perceived what others considered as right–the subjugation and oppression of non-white South Africans–was wrong. But from another perspective, and from the eyes of other people, Gandhi was WRONG!
With all of this being said, it’s very possible that you would begin to find it beneficial to become a society unto yourself and decide what is right and what is wrong relative to you. Please watch the video below for an elaboration of the aforementioned ideas.
“Relative morality” – if it were – by itself is not an original concept. It is a concept that has stumped political theorists, from Aristotle to Dahl. What is correct? How do we avoid imposing correctness, whether it is a correctness perceived by an individual, a group, or even a majority. Indeed, Jinnah-ism answers the question with an omniarchism and this is an original idea worth discussing because it answers the question of relative morality – how do we make a governing power that takes into consideration contrasting ideas?
Gandhi was at the forefront of this movement to embrace relative morality. He suggested, as Meher Baba does as well, that morality shouldn’t be imposed by coercion but rather advised and petitioned with love – the premise of Gandhi’s non-violent movement. So, yes, in many South African, Muslim, and Hindu (as he was in the end killed by “his own kind”) eyes, Gandhi was wrong. But he in no way was so power-oriented as to WANT to tell them what to do or to make them change their minds. He simply wanted to bring about a change by meeting a grievance – people cannot be discriminated against anymore. Thus, though this is correct – “Gandhi went to South Africa and perceived what others considered as right–the subjugation and oppression of non-white South Africans–was wrong. But from another perspective, and from the eyes of other people, Gandhi was WRONG!” It is incorrect to say that Gandhi had imposed his beliefs.
Thank you for sharing this. It brings together some ideas that I have been dealing with recently, as well.
Hello, friend. Great comment! And yeah, by no means is relative morality an original concept, haha. Just something that was going through my head. Also, the title “Gandhi was wrong,” only refers to the fact that what Gandhi advocated for, regardless of how “right” it is for me and others, was/is wrong through the eyes of those who disagree(d) with him. Thank you for all of your words, I loved reading them, and I also learned some new things!