I found myself in a discussion about historical materialism where I ended up saying something along the lines of “scientific progress helps us to build more ethical societies because it enables us to see through the injustices of race, religion, and capitalism.” I was kind of firing from the hip, but I couldn’t think of anything better to say. My conversation partner asked me if I thought you could do a scientific experiment or analysis on a moral problem, and I was frankly stumped.

I know we aren’t supposed to think in moral categories, but I sense every one of us thinks, and correct me if I’m wrong, that capitalism is wrong and communism is right morally speaking. With that in mind, as contradictions are resolved per historical materialism and as different peoples have socialist revolutions within their societies, do these societies become more moral in any sense?

  • @OrnluWolfjarl
    link
    62 years ago

    Discussions on morality can be convoluted. People will disagree on even the definition of morality, whether it’s objective or subjective, etc. And people can and will always end up “accusing” your morality of being defined by your ideology and therefore biased. From a Marxist perspective the morality of a society is defined by the ruling class. For example, in a slave-owning society, owning slaves would not be considered immoral. Similarly, in a capitalist society, owning capital is not considered immoral by most people.

    Instead of talking about “morality”, you should talk about what you ACTUALLY mean, which is what benefits people the most. Data on people’s happiness and well-being are far more objective and easily supported than discussing the finer details of moral philosophy and personal morality.