This recent article in The New Scientist about a recent study that repeats an older study that researches how far people would go to punish a person who answers a question incorrectly.
The researchers seem surprised that people would go to the point of torturing people when authorised to do so. Do these people live in the real world? There is not much that people would not do given the circumstances. In my experience people in general have a fairly weak moral compass and will redefine their morality to suite their environment, especially if subject to enough peer pressure and given sanction to do so. There have been many examples in recent years of people behaving in immoral ways in response to external influences. People refer to Abu Ghraib as if it was some exception, but really it is the norm for such environments.
I am not referring to Muslim extremists, they are being wholly consistent. They may behave in ways that we consider abhorrent but at least they are being honest. No need to redefine the term torture for them. No need to engage in some convoluted reasoning and complex situational ethics for them. Their philosophy is clear and simple. Whether we agree or not with their morality at least it is consistent. History is littered with one person’s shifting morality winning out over the defeated parties simple morality. Not only does the loosing side in a war have to bear the ignominy of being defeated in battle, they then have to be subject to the moral superiority of the victors. History is supposed to subjectively analyse events but when was history ever objective? Victors will use any meas at their disposal to justify their actions.
Modern man has made moral flexibility even easier with the abandonment of all things religious. One thing that religion does (I am not talking about culture here – please note there IS a difference) is provide a moral framework for our behaviour. One significant difference between the Muslim extremists and the US is that the US has abandened moral fundamentals for a moral flexibility that changes with the requirements whereas the Muslim extremists have a firm moral position. Once you abanden religion you chan define morality however you like.
As a Christian my morality is based firmly on a clear belief system and my whole moral framework is based on the Christian paragygm. As such there is no room for the type of behaviour highlighted in the study above or in Abu Ghraib. I may disagree with the extremists but admire their moral consistency.
I think the only reason that the researchers were surprised was they they failed to understand the basic concepts of morality and what drives man’s psyche. I am not at all surprised based on my knowledge of human nature. As the prophet said “The heart of man is desperately wicked”.