Medicine, education, judicial system… morality is relevant not only towards any direct purpose but also in how things are done. This may be seen as the deeper purpose.
Morality being about ‘relief of suffering’ – of oneself and others [see ‘Morality Is the Relief of Suffering’] – it is relevant in many domains, including in many ways that are not immediately obvious.
Morality being about ‘depth’, one can see this everywhere humans are involved. There is no conscious human without a huge degree of depth. Of course, since this is mainly nonconscious, one doesn’t readily see it in a conscious way. Thus we lead conscious lives as though it’s not there. At the same time, our own depth is present in every action, every feeling, every thought.
Including in every bit of how we morally act, feel, think.
This is about a direct relief of suffering, as well as in how people are made (invited, incentivized) into beings that to a higher degree relieve suffering.
Medicine used to be about curing disease. It still is, to many. In 1948 (!), the World Health Organization proclaimed a definition of ‘health’ – and striving towards it – incorporating well-being. A giant step.
I take it one (giant) step further, incorporating depth. One can strive towards superficial well-being and at the same time get into a deep depression which is in the make during and maybe even because of the superficiality. So, in order to be realistic, the definition of ‘health’ should include depth.
In medicine as everywhere, this is related to the deeper purpose.
A superficial purpose may be to relieve symptoms (less pain, less eczema…) without taking into account anything else but the symptom as it shows. However, many symptoms being ‘psycho-somatic’ in nature, they are just, well, symptoms of something deeper.
My contention is that the latter is also hugely important in the suffering (present and future) of the patient, as well as how this patient will act further on in the world and have influence on many others. This influence may be provoked consciously and nonconsciously. It’s about causation/relief of suffering. It’s about morality.
A main purpose is to come to morally good human beings who also have the means to be effective as such. One can try to instill morality by giving the rules of good conduct. This hardly works, as has been shown a bazillion times.
So, here too, depth needs to be taken into account
not as a sidekick but incorporated into the educational effort itself. Of course, as a starters, through the example of the teacher. Also, in how the student is supposed to use his brain while learning. For instance, learning something ‘by heart’ may be a mechanical act, or it may indeed involve ‘the heart’. The difference is huge: the latter is a more meditative stance. The new info is not just poured into the brain/mind, but also organically changes it in due ways, strengthening it and inviting ‘growth’ as total human being. Nothing enters our mind without possible consequences of growth. Of course, I know this is seldom taken into account.
Example: judicial system
Someone did a moral wrong. ‘Punishment’ as we know it does not have as goal: going into depth. Should it? I definitely think so.
To me, a judicial system without ‘depth’ bears little morality.
This is of course not about being lenient or not. It’s not about the victimizer being more – nor less – valued as the victim. Both are human beings with ‘depth’. Both deserve ‘depth’ to be taken into account. Also the possible future victims are important, as well as all people concerned. Precisely for these purposes, working with depth is not only needed. It is necessary. It doesn’t alienate us from the real purpose. It IS the real purpose.
It starts with insight. I hope this text has brought you some.
In general, the purpose of AURELIS is to provide at least partial answers to the concrete how-to. If you want to cooperate towards this, please use it.