Q&A: Morality in Non-Social Contexts
Morality in Non-Social Contexts
Question
Rabbi Michi,
Could you please explain to me, broadly speaking, what you think is wrong with the common moral view nowadays that says you’re allowed to do whatever you want as long as you don’t harm other people—what is the problem with this view? (For example: there is no problem with having relations before marriage as long as it is consensual.)
On the face of it, it allows for maximum individual freedom, and you are very much in favor of that. I’m aiming for an answer without getting into the religious dimension at all, because the religious starting point is often that there are things that precede morality, such as holiness, etc., and then the problem is obvious anyway.
Answer
I do not see any fundamental problem with this. On the principled level, it is correct. Still, alongside that there are a few other aspects that should be taken into account. For example, there are actions that are immoral even though they do not directly harm anyone, and nevertheless it is forbidden to do them (such as tax evasion or not voting in elections; see Booklet 4 on the categorical imperative). In addition, there is a way of life that is not value-driven, even though it is hard to say that there is a moral problem with it—such as a nihilistic life of pleasure alone, without engagement in things of value. That is what Nachmanides describes in “You shall be holy.”