Moral Superiority, Part II

I do not pretend to have a complete answer for all my readers who have been kind enough to respond. I am, however, caught by TheBloke questioning the utility of the proof. That's where my mind has been the past few days.

Consider how the politically correct no-morality-is-superior idea is utilized today. I do not think it makes a pretty picture.

Walk through an airport: Security must assume everyday that a young middle-eastern man who probably come from a background where the killing of "infidels and unbelievers" is actively promoted is equally likely to be as good as the little old lady whose primary concern is the well-being of her parakeet in the cargo hold. Well, if I was a security officer, and those were the rules, I might try to search more little old ladies than necessary -- they won't protest as much, and the job will go that much faster...

Or look at our schools. If all moralities are equal, and America is primarily Christian (with a few Jews here and there) than it follows that atheism and Islam are underrepresented, hence the suppression of Christian displays and the appearance of the celebratory film "The Sword of Islam" as classroom instruction.

Or look at the media. Radical Islamists attack defenseless Jews, Christians, or Muslims and the MSM always reports that BOTH communities are at fault. As long as the MSM stick to the politically correct line they can do little else.

Now consider the application of the idea that moral superiority exists even if we do not define what the standard of moral superiority is. (Such a definition was never part of my proof.)

The airport: Security can now look at everyone with a discerning eye based upon experience, rather than enforced race-neutral prejudice. "Harassment" rules still apply, as they do for everyone, but the nonsense with quotas disappears. No more class-action suits!

Education: Teachers are now more free to target specific techniques to specific groups, are freer to discipline individuals in troubled communities, and can apply their own judgment, or that of the community, to deciding the "moral" education of their youth.

Media: Journalists would be able to tell the unvarnished truth, without forced ideological distortions.

Of course, there are many other vested interests, and even some laws, in the way of applying this principle, which I now think of as, "For every choice, a moral superiority exists, even if we don't know what that is." If that doesn't sound as satisfactory as previous concepts of absolute moral superiority given by a particular religion or the absolute moral equality of the pre 9-11 world, I say: well, it will grow more familiar with greater use.

I note that these arguments do not form a rigorous proof and I invite my readers to poke into any holes they may discover.