Imagination and Morality

Read a book, listen to a story that someone’s telling, watch a movie, and if they’re any good, you’d be moved to tears, inspired, touched, angry; and you want to do something to make a change for the better. This is what a story does to you. But, it also appeals to your imagination. It is the only faculty, not reason, that allows you to enter the world of another human being. Story telling and imagination are powerful combination. Without a story, moreso, without the ability to imagine, life would be meaningless, unconnected dots of facts. Want to know what it’s like? Just look at any statistics or a resume of someone who’s looking for a job. You don’t feel a thing. You are detached - a high wall that bars you from seeing people other than statistics on a graph.

Imagination opens you up to a world that isn’t yours. Imagination allows you hear not just their stories, but their heartbreak, their sorrows, their joys. I had just finished reading a news about a 9 year old girl, murdered by a family friend. It is awful to die during Christmas season only because it is the time - I want to believe - when no crime is committed. I turned the page. Her death was just another news amongst countless news unrelated to me, my life. Imagination could have made the death of a beautiful child my own story if I chose to weave a story out of it.

Moral values are like news. We all know that ‘Do unto others as you want others to do unto you’ makes sense only if we are a victim of injustice. The golden rule applies when I am involved, when I feel that I have been wronged.

We are taught the golden rule. But, we have all taken it to apply to ourselves and not to the others.

We are taught that the golden rule and other ethical codes are the principles of reason, not of emotion. So, the teaching of the golden rule and other ethical codes are treated in the same way science and mathematics are presented.

But, this is very wrong.

Moral codes are emotion based that are best presented to the imagination by way of a story. If we were taught this way, then we would be receptive to the world of other persons. Only then will we be able to see ourselves in the light of their stories. Moral teachings/stories aren't just about ways of fulfilling one’s happiness. They are there for us to reach out to the other, to go beyond our limited and limiting perception, bias and prejudice. And, only then are we able to correct ourselves and follow the golden rule and other ethical codes - for it matters not to us, but to them as well.

Deadly Oneness of Truth

Should we still be insisting on - what more, be believing in - the absoluteness of truth? Could we ever arrive at one conclusion so everyone could finally live in peace with one another? Or, were we all destined to wage war for all eternity until the there is only one man left standing? Is such a notion of truth dangerous?

'Deadly' Truth 

Truth, it was said, is One and Absolute, and independent of the knower. Truth, of this kind, depends not on what the knower thinks it is or should be. The knower, to know the truth, must align himself to it. He must be ready to receive its light. Truth, it was conceived, is timeless and quite objective. However, only a few are privileged to know such a truth. And they announced it to the 'underprivileged' which make up the great majority of the human population.

The 'underprivileged many' was attracted to such a notion of truth. So intense were their emotions that they believed to have seen the Truth. Truth, they argue, is on their side. And, they would insist on it, even wage a holy war if need be. Indeed they have waged holy wars amongst nations, communities and in their neighbourhood. Such is the social and political consequence of believing in the notion that Truth is the One and the Absolute.

It’s not a matter of (a) fact

Truth, many believe, is a fact to which they add: it is an undeniable fact. But, that's confusing the two terms.

Is it a fact that a big, unusual looking bone an evidence of evolution? Sure, if you’re a paleontologist or a believer in the theory of evolution. To someone who does not share your belief, the big unusual looking bone is not a proof of evolution. If two or more persons see the same thing in two different ways, then there is a distinction between a fact and a truth. Let me explain.

Truth is not equated to a fact, and vice versa. Something becomes a fact when it fits into the story you believe in. Something is true because it intensifies your involvement in the story, your story. It is the story that causes a fact to rise up and present itself as true. This is the power of the story for it gives birth to the notion of truth. There is no truth outside a story. Without a story we would not be able to make sense of the world and the things that happen in it. We could not utter the word 'truth'. (A world, interestingly, is created through and by a story.)

Tell Stories, not the truth

The conflict between individuals and groups then is not a quarrel about whether truth is absolute or relative. The conflict, which oftentimes ends in violence, is the failure on our part to realize that what’s being told is a story. Can you say that a story is (the) truth?  After reading a book of fiction, and remarking that 'it is so true',  are you then not enlightened? Someone's story expresses your story, and deepens and widens the quality of your story, your life. And, it does without telling the truth. Stories try to make sense of it all in the midst of chaos.Without a story, life would be meaningless, bereft of hope. 

Just as there are many communities there are many stories. Stories are meant to be told and to be listened, to, and the chance to acquire deeper appreciation and understanding of the world and ourselves.

When was the last time you listened to a story?