At last week’s Kinship Cafe, we discussed a passage from Liezi, one of the key early writers who shaped Daoism. Here is another quote from chapter one that I find interesting:
“The man who, when his actions go wrong, begins to play about with moral distinctions in order to put them right, cannot find the way back.” (Chapter 1, A.C. Graham)
This is the story of justification. A man screwed up, and rather than admit his mistake, he seeks to justify it through clever moral distinctions. But in doing so, he gets himself so tangled up that he can’t find a way back out. Has this ever happened to you? I know I have found myself bound in my own trap many times. Why is it so hard to admit when we are wrong? I hate to admit it, but I often desire not to look like I made a mistake. Which is silly because we all do. In trying to hide it, we complicate relationships, and most people can see through the masquerade anyway.
I find it interesting that the passage does not say he tries to come up with excuses, but instead he “begins to play about with moral distinctions”. Moral language is the most incendiary language we can use. It strives to create a division that goes beyond a disagreement, to “if you disagree with me, you are immoral.” Morality assumes itself to be objectively true, that it can’t be questioned. Stepping into moral justifications for one’s actions is an attempt to silence disagreement or discussion. Moral justifications cancel the possibility of compromise and create the strongest possible “us vs. them” mentality.
Resorting to moral justifications is a clear indication that a person lacks valid reasons for their actions. Playing about with moral distinctions risks inciting hate or even violence. We can see how going down this road, we might find ourselves so lost we “cannot find our way back.”
What do you think?