Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Moral Consensus: Impossible

No matter the issue, the fierce debates we have often end up bitterly dividing us. But that’s only because we let them.

By Wayne Prins, Executive Director

I’ve always enjoyed the Mission: Impossible movies. There’s nothing realistic about clinging to the outside of a military cargo jet as it takes off and gains altitude or sprinting for extended periods of time, jumping from one rooftop to the next, but the action is captivating, and the stories are fun. And every single time, just when you think Tom Cruise has run out of options and failure is imminent, he finds a way to prevail. He always comes through in the end.

If only life was that way. Unfortunately, it clearly isn’t. Life is often hard—one challenge after another. And living in community is hard. Neighbours can be wonderful and loving; they can also be downright horrible, like living next to an enemy.

The same is true for coworkers, classmates, teammates, and even family members. It seems, particularly in recent times, that every time we turn around we’re confronted with another problem or argument that we need to work through. And again, things don’t always end up going that well.

If you take the common themes of today’s arguments and dig a little deeper, you’ll find that every position someone takes on an issue—including your own—is based on a certain framework of understanding what is right and what is wrong in the world around you. Your beliefs and values about what is good for the world are generally understood to be your morals, and your morals usually have a strong influence on how you behave and what you say in moments of debate or disagreement.

Let’s take the obvious example that’s on everyone’s mind: vaccines. The vast majority of Canadians—and CLAC members for that matter—believe that everyone should get the COVID-19 vaccine.

The word should is far more loaded than you might think at first. Why exactly should someone do anything? When someone argues that someone else should do something—such as get vaccinated—they are assuming that both people are operating with the same set of foundational beliefs and values for what is good for the world around them. The fierce division that follows each new vaccine mandate or policy is clear evidence that no such moral consensus exists.

Furthermore, when we engage in heated debate about such things, we are doing so in the vain hope that a moral consensus is possible—if we can just win the argument. Well, I submit to you that a moral consensus on just about anything is simply impossible. This is true as it relates to COVID-19 vaccines, and it is true for every other social or political or ethical issue we face. Understanding and accepting this reality is the first step toward building and preserving harmonious communities that are characterized by tolerance, diversity, and inclusivity.

Most, if not all of you, will have observed or participated in intense debates about thorny issues. I personally enjoy a robust debate with thoughtful people, so long as all parties are committed to respectful discourse—and no violence, please!

But we should all be cautious when the conversation turns into a competition about whose morals are superior and whose morals are wanting. The pursuit of moral consensus is futile, and diversity of opinion is as valuable to society as any other form of diversity.

CLAC is committed to supporting diversity of opinion in communities—especially work communities—that is positive, collaborative, and tolerant. In these difficult times, full of difficult issues, rather than letting our differences divide us, let’s pursue respect and harmony with each other—especially those with whom we disagree.

Moral Consensus: Impossible

You might be interested in