The effect of parental influence on morality.

To begin our discussion of what makes one moral, I find it proper to first discuss the main influences on the perception of morality all of us already have. One of the dominant influences on the morality of a person is the belief of their parents and how they were brought up. This is by no means a new discussion, as it has long been included in the debate between nature and nurture. One the one side of the debate, numerous similarities can be drawn between a person and their parents. However, at times it seems some folks are without help. For an unknown reason, some people are born to be bad. This debate will no doubt continue on, but for the purpose of this post, we'll consider the effect of parental influence, whether it be marginal or major, to be important enough for further exploration.

The problem with the assumption that we are so strongly imparted on from our parents is that if one were to go back in time enough generations, they would need to recognize that we all come from one source. So, if parental influence were all it took to make a person's psyche, we would all be the same. But, this too is an inadequate argument. Just because you or someone else is not identical to their parents does not disprove or disregard their ability to influence you. I've noticed an oddly under-discussed portion of parental influence that I think is particularly prevalent in our modern society. For lack of a better term, I'll coin it “Inverse Influence”. Inverse influence comes into play when the child recognizes the faults of their parents (or disagrees with their correct philosophy) because of a negative effect on the parent perceived by the child. This phenomenon is shown when the child of an uncontrollable alcoholic decides to abstain from alcohol or when a victim of abuse refrains from violence. This influence, like direct influence, is not always positive or correct, but explains at least in part the discrepancy between parental and child philosophy within a single generation.

The influence of a parent is one of the most overt in the mind of a person, because the decision to adhere or defy the rules of a parental figure is often conscious. Most people who stray from the ideology of their parents do so for a specific purpose, either because they believe it ended badly for their parent or because they recognize that the opinions of their parent is in conflict with the morals they've had instilled in them from some other source. In a similar manner, the adherence to a parent's philosophy is usually paired with memories of positive experiences in which the opinion of the parent yielded a good outcome.

In all, the philosophy of one's parents is a powerful influence on the future opinions of their child. This can have positive or negative effects, and be an inspiration to similar or opposite ideology.

Taking an active role in our own morality.

Morality, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary, is a collection of "Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior." We all have a set of morals, whether or not we recognize it, that define the actions and consequences we find acceptable and provide input as to which choices we make. These morals can be extracted from a variety of sources including parental influence, religious belief, past experience, emotion, and our perception of those around us.

Up until very recent history, the prevailing moral influence on life was (at least in popular opinion) religious belief. Although all of the other influences were present, morality as it pertained to daily life was mostly about the dedication and praise of one's chosen deity. However, with the rise of Atheism and the stagnation of organized religions, there is a widely recognized gap in all of our psyches where there once stood an immovable wall to keep our actions in check. To acclimate to this new moral chasm, I've coined the term "Junctional Morality" to describe the process with which I believe actions, consequences, and opinions can be segregated into acceptable and unacceptable divisions.

My own morality is based on the belief that this need which was historically fulfilled by religion has not been lost and can be intentionally filled with another system of morality. In the place of the wall previously dictating the actions of religious followers, I believe that a flexible system of morality can function in a similar, but more effective manner. It's not exclusively a collection of outside sources that dictates our choices. We have control of ourselves. Truly moral life can only be achieved by taking an active role in discerning between right and wrong. This means venturing, studying to better ourselves. It means accepting at times when it may be difficult to do so that we are not already moral. It means making first hand decisions in an effort to increase our system of moral, in an effort to perfect morality within ourselves and others.

The purpose of this blog will be to more clearly define the forks that we all meet in the road to positive morality and to help readers understand my own decision making process. This blog is a statement of opinion, theory, and conjecture. It is not meant by any means to erupt into social upheaval, nor is it a blog make believers out of the wicked. The morals and guidelines defined in my writing may be accepted or rejected without reproach. It is my sincerest hope that you consider my opinions and use them to better yourself, if such a thing is possible and necessary. Thank you for reading.