Don't say that word

This article on the "pursuit of happiness" was on the NY Times most emailed list for nearly a week after its appearance. It's actually on the proliferation of "positive psychology" classes in colleges and universities. Given the article's length and subject matter, it could be dissected and discussed from numerous angles. Assuming my brief attention span is not diverted by other matters (you know what they say about assuming), I hope to return to it. I want to highlight this intriguing paragraph:

I sat in on the course a few more times during the semester, and when Kashdan was done with pleasure versus selfless giving, he took up gratitude and forgiveness, close relationships and love, then spirituality and well-being and finally “meaning and purpose in life.” “I never use the word morality,” Kashdan said. Rather his goal was to show that “there are ways of living that research shows lead to better outcomes.”

There are a number of things immediately striking. The first of which is that these issues are unavoidable. Now, what’s interesting is that here we have what is for all intents and purposes a “religion” class (it deals with the issues and questions religions generally address), not in order to critically study the religion – history, development, etc., which is the usual approach in colleges and universities - but in the manner of instruction/ indoctrination as to how to live. I’m not writing this in order to complain of “bias” or to cry “no fair,” but only to point out that the lines sometimes drawn with respect to these matters are not nearly as clear as is sometimes maintained. Issues of meaning, purpose, how to live well – which any perspective on reality, life, humanity will address – are essential to being human and are, broadly speaking, “religious.”

Now, the instructor tries to get around this by avoiding the word “morality.” This avoidance strikes me as bordering on taboo, with “morality” being a “bad” word that’s forbidden. I’m reminded of a familiar phrase pertaining to a certain aquatic fowl that talks and walks. Immediately problematic is the fact that forgiveness necessarily entails a moral judgment concerning the wrongfulness of the conduct of the “forgiven” person. As a matter of fact, “I forgive you” can be offensive to a person who doesn’t think he’s done anything wrong that warrants forgiveness. “I forgive you” basically means “you’ve done something wrong, but I will not hold it against you.” Absent morality, forgiveness is gutted of any meaning.

Furthermore, our understanding of life’s meaning and purpose is inextricably tied to morality. To posit that morality is disconnected from meaning, purpose, relationships and love would render “morality” an arbitrary set of rules disconnected from reality. Whether or not we agree with their particular claims, any set of moral directives is designed to be consistent with questions of meaning and purpose, etc. That is what we have here – guidelines for life arising out of consideration of these larger questions. And it is not the case that the students are to figure out these matters for themselves. They have come to receive instruction from an authority figure, in order to appropriate what is inescapably moral guidance. The fact he says this is only about "better" outcomes does not change this. "Better' is not a morally neutral word, but implies a hierarchy of outcomes.

One of the points of the article, it seems to me, is that reality has a discernible shape. And it is up to us to conform ourselves to its, dare I say, "authority," as opposed to doing what we "feel" or "want," if we are to live well. This truth is not negated by the fact we don't achieve consensus or always agree. Intuitively we should know this to be the case. With respect to those things that matter to us, such as our careers, health and fitness, finances, hobbies, etc., we submit our inclinations and desires to their "authority" in order that we might be "good" in that area of our life. One should expect that to be the case with respect to life's most essential issues and questions.