
Decline and decay of moral values
If procuring great happiness for highest number of people is the motive, it doesn't mean that immoral action (means) is allowed. No expediency of any sorts can be a tool to sacrifice morals. T. S. Eliot put it aptly: 'The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason.'
As a corollary to my thought, I am tempted to use words of Aldous Huxley, where he says, 'The end cannot justify the means, for the simple and obvious reason that the means employed determine the nature of the ends produced '.
The difference between a moral man and a man of honour is that the latter regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught. 'Everything's got a moral, if only you can find it' (Alice in Wonderland- Lewis Carroll). Moral standards are not to be confused as statements for stagnation of society, instead the standard must be perceived as statement of immortality. Truth cannot ever be a negative quality.
Morality is a feel-good factor and immorality renders to the soul a feel bad factor, post, an act, deed or spoken word. Smile dances upon morality while frown frocks immorality. Moral standards are meant to subjugate the base and animal instincts man possess.
Moral values are shaped by cultural, societal, religious and universal principles of good behaviour, inclusive of ethics, forbearance, tolerance and justice. These moral standards serve as a beacon of light to guide individuals in the dark maze of life, in making a proper estimation of what is right and what is not. The results of this determination serve to influence our thoughts, behaviour and conduct.
'Without civic morality communities perish; without personal morality their survival has no value.' (Bertrand Russell).
The essential principles of moral standards, upon which hinges the entire edifice of human behaviour, include presence of unimpeachable integrity and honesty, uncompromising respect for human life and above all unflinching faith in the divine mechanism of retribution relating to responsibility and accountability. I grew up in a regimented Roman Catholic environment at school, where morals as a subject was emphasised.
At the end of each class, a narration of moral behaviour was part of the routine. The indoctrination of values has to be done during the period when minds are free of pollution and distortions; and are soft sponges to absorb the instillation of the criterion and discernment faculty of selecting between what is good, right and what is not, and is wrong.
In the world of philosophy, the study of ethics or moral principles deals with effect upon human behaviour of universally accepted principles, customs and traditions.
The behaviour code of a society is dependent upon individuals having a defined and strict moral compass. It is not merely a concept but a method of leading life, with guiding principles of moral values, obligations and of making decisions in life based on the ideals of purpose and need. We are blessed as a Nation to be an Islamic country. We have the Code and the Compass. But are we in adherence?
Chris Drew, a Professor by profession, in a paper on moral values has an appendix to it titled A to Z of moral values; of these I would highlight the following: Benev olence, compassion, courage, dignity, forgiveness, generosity, honest, integrity, justice, kindness, mercy, responsibility, toleranc e, trust and wisdom. Reading the list, I wondered if he was giving the definition of a Muslim as seen through the lens of the Holy Book.
At the University of Oxford, anthropologists have discovered what they believe to be seven universal values. The rules are: help your family, return favours, be brave, defer to superiors, divide resources fairly, and respect others' property. Dr. Oliver Scott Curry, senior researcher at the Institute for Cognitive and Evolu tionary Anthropology, said: 'As predicted, these seven moral principles appear to be universal across cultures. Everyone everywhere shares a common moral code. All agree that cooperating, promoting the common good, is the right thing to do.'
Moral philosophy has existed over a thousand years — it keeps on growing and evolving, with each era of human history. Its foundations are strongly entrenched, based on experience, relating to morality, values, ethics and the many obligations that sprout from these pillars of thought.
This formidable, yet delicate, fabric of morality and moral being continues to being torn to shreds by the Israeli army in Gaza. Human morality has become a utopia — it is today buried in the cemetery, called Gaza; alongside women, innocent and raped; men, brave and tortured and children shocked and starved. The hands of the dial of the moral compass are broken and detached — these lie splintered and mutilated in form and dug deeply into the heart of the Gazans.
To protect sanity and mental well-being, I decided about three months back to abandon the long established habit of watching with keen interest political talk shows. These have not only becoming boring but were also sporting the same spent bullets on a regular basis, as guests and experts—invariably all would express about the future, as if the book of human wisdom lay revealed upon their hearts. The contents of the programme of late are toxic and the guests, more toxic. To expect morality from seasoned positions is to expect the rising of the Sun from not the west but South!
Slumping after day's work before the idiotbox (TV) I began to watch some local drama serials. Little did I know what cultural shock I was to receive. There are at least three serials which are stated to be purely family dramas but not in the traditions of Haseena Moin's, or of the quality of Parchayian, Aangan Terra, etc. These are of present day and age.
The scripts and playwright have contents that are socially obnoxious. The dialogues rarely meet the moral standards of our society, culture and traditions. Brazenness in speech is the hallmark of humility and politeness it appears. The plots of each are one of rebellion by off-springs against parents.
The rebuke and disdain in conversations with parents and elders is pronounced. The youth falling into waywardness is prominent — in fact, sometimes it is glorified to actually make the impressionable age viewers to get tempted to enact the scenes in real life. At the drop of hat, children are seen threatening parents to leave their parental abodes.
In every of those dramas, the attempted suicide on trivial issues is a high climax point. Are we selling suicide as a panacea for ills of life? Why so much screen space is being given to suicide scenes? Is it glorification or a sign of courage? What exactly is the message?
The ennoblement of seeking relationships outside the ambit of religious and societal limitations is rampant; if for a moment, it was to be accepted as a happening thing in the society, what is the rate of incidence? Negligible. By projection with glamour and magnification, aren't we giving it a traction — an open invitation.
From the decade of the 1980s and later, we have progressed. But is progress a reason to abandon the standards of morality, which are meant to be linchpin for the growth of society? The race to become wealthy without corresponding hard work or honesty is projected.
'There can be no civility without a deep morality, though it may not always call itself by that name' and, 'The evolution of a highly destined society must be moral; it must run in the grooves of the celestial wheels' ( Ralph Walton Emerson).
As hapless citizens we are caught between the toxic political talk shows and the despicable contents of several dramas. How much can we force people to watch National Geographic or Animal Planet? The impelling question is why this slide into moral degradation? Why is the immoral behaviour being given a status and exaltation? This must cease.
All sections of society must play a role to recover our traditions of morality and nobility. Progress is being confused with liberation from cultural standards of moral behaviour. Let there be rejuvenation of our unique standards of noble behaviour.
'The nation's morals are like its teeth: the more decayed the more it hurts to touch them' (George Bernard Shaw).
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Express Tribune
14-07-2025
- Express Tribune
ICE raids strip LA's Fashion District of its style and soul
At Cuernavaca's Grill, a Mexican restaurant in the Fashion District of downtown Los Angeles, owner Nayomie Mendoza is used to seeing customers line up for lunch. But the vibrant neighbourhood filled with boutiques and shops has become a ghost town amid raids by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out President Donald Trump's hard-line policy of sweeping up and deporting undocumented immigrants. Even in the early summer season when tourists flock to the southern California city, Mendoza is left staring at empty tables. "A lot of our neighbours are afraid to go out" because of the ICE presence in Los Angeles, Mendoza said, with the city boasting a significant Latino workforce. "Our sales... they've been down by 80 per cent," Mendoza told AFP. "It's hurting more than ever." The "saving grace" for the restaurant in this time has been delivery orders, she said. 'Worse than COVID' As a so-called "sanctuary city" with hundreds of thousands of undocumented people, Los Angeles has been in the crosshairs of the Trump administration since the Republican returned to power in January. After ICE raids spurred unrest and protests last month, Trump dispatched the National Guard and US Marines to quell the disruption. Washington does not seem to be backing down anytime soon. "Better get used to us now, because this is going to be normal very soon. We will go anywhere, anytime we want in Los Angeles," US Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino told broadcaster Fox News on Monday. "The federal government is not leaving LA," he added. Local businesses dependent on foot traffic are the collateral damage of the raids, Mendoza said. "This is probably worse than COVID," she said, referring to mandatory lockdowns during the pandemic. Manuel Suarez, a street vendor near Cuernavaca's Grill, agreed. "Now is worse because during the pandemic, even though it was a pandemic, there were sales," said the toy vendor, who has worked in the Fashion District for 35 years. "Now it's completely in crisis," he told AFP. Suarez said many merchants have closed their stores as a precaution as raids intensify in the city, or have otherwise cut the number of employees due to drops in sales. Cat and mouse "Here in downtown and in LA, there's been a lot of raids because of ICE, so it has brought fear into our Latin community," said Jose Yern, manager of Anita's Bridal Boutique, a Fashion District shop specializing in dresses for Latin American "quinceanera" coming-of-age ceremonies. "They are scared to come in (to the district). But if they're coming in, they're coming specifically to a specific store, doing what they need to do, and then heading back home," he added. Shopkeepers communicate with one another via walkie-talkies, reporting any noise, helicopter or law enforcement presence to warn those who are undocumented. "It's unfortunate that the government does not understand that when it attacks us, we all lose," said a vendor who did not want to disclose his name for privacy reasons. "But we are not leaving. What's going to happen here is that we are going to be playing cat and mouse. Let's see who tires out first." AFP


Business Recorder
09-07-2025
- Business Recorder
Decline and decay of moral values
'Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt lictia' is the Latin for 'the end justifies the means'. No. It doesn't and must not be sanctioned with acceptance. If the end is ignoble no means are justifiable. The acceptance of the idiom will mean that when the end is permitted, the means also stand permitted. If procuring great happiness for highest number of people is the motive, it doesn't mean that immoral action (means) is allowed. No expediency of any sorts can be a tool to sacrifice morals. T. S. Eliot put it aptly: 'The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason.' As a corollary to my thought, I am tempted to use words of Aldous Huxley, where he says, 'The end cannot justify the means, for the simple and obvious reason that the means employed determine the nature of the ends produced '. The difference between a moral man and a man of honour is that the latter regrets a discreditable act, even when it has worked and he has not been caught. 'Everything's got a moral, if only you can find it' (Alice in Wonderland- Lewis Carroll). Moral standards are not to be confused as statements for stagnation of society, instead the standard must be perceived as statement of immortality. Truth cannot ever be a negative quality. Morality is a feel-good factor and immorality renders to the soul a feel bad factor, post, an act, deed or spoken word. Smile dances upon morality while frown frocks immorality. Moral standards are meant to subjugate the base and animal instincts man possess. Moral values are shaped by cultural, societal, religious and universal principles of good behaviour, inclusive of ethics, forbearance, tolerance and justice. These moral standards serve as a beacon of light to guide individuals in the dark maze of life, in making a proper estimation of what is right and what is not. The results of this determination serve to influence our thoughts, behaviour and conduct. 'Without civic morality communities perish; without personal morality their survival has no value.' (Bertrand Russell). The essential principles of moral standards, upon which hinges the entire edifice of human behaviour, include presence of unimpeachable integrity and honesty, uncompromising respect for human life and above all unflinching faith in the divine mechanism of retribution relating to responsibility and accountability. I grew up in a regimented Roman Catholic environment at school, where morals as a subject was emphasised. At the end of each class, a narration of moral behaviour was part of the routine. The indoctrination of values has to be done during the period when minds are free of pollution and distortions; and are soft sponges to absorb the instillation of the criterion and discernment faculty of selecting between what is good, right and what is not, and is wrong. In the world of philosophy, the study of ethics or moral principles deals with effect upon human behaviour of universally accepted principles, customs and traditions. The behaviour code of a society is dependent upon individuals having a defined and strict moral compass. It is not merely a concept but a method of leading life, with guiding principles of moral values, obligations and of making decisions in life based on the ideals of purpose and need. We are blessed as a Nation to be an Islamic country. We have the Code and the Compass. But are we in adherence? Chris Drew, a Professor by profession, in a paper on moral values has an appendix to it titled A to Z of moral values; of these I would highlight the following: Benev olence, compassion, courage, dignity, forgiveness, generosity, honest, integrity, justice, kindness, mercy, responsibility, toleranc e, trust and wisdom. Reading the list, I wondered if he was giving the definition of a Muslim as seen through the lens of the Holy Book. At the University of Oxford, anthropologists have discovered what they believe to be seven universal values. The rules are: help your family, return favours, be brave, defer to superiors, divide resources fairly, and respect others' property. Dr. Oliver Scott Curry, senior researcher at the Institute for Cognitive and Evolu tionary Anthropology, said: 'As predicted, these seven moral principles appear to be universal across cultures. Everyone everywhere shares a common moral code. All agree that cooperating, promoting the common good, is the right thing to do.' Moral philosophy has existed over a thousand years — it keeps on growing and evolving, with each era of human history. Its foundations are strongly entrenched, based on experience, relating to morality, values, ethics and the many obligations that sprout from these pillars of thought. This formidable, yet delicate, fabric of morality and moral being continues to being torn to shreds by the Israeli army in Gaza. Human morality has become a utopia — it is today buried in the cemetery, called Gaza; alongside women, innocent and raped; men, brave and tortured and children shocked and starved. The hands of the dial of the moral compass are broken and detached — these lie splintered and mutilated in form and dug deeply into the heart of the Gazans. To protect sanity and mental well-being, I decided about three months back to abandon the long established habit of watching with keen interest political talk shows. These have not only becoming boring but were also sporting the same spent bullets on a regular basis, as guests and experts—invariably all would express about the future, as if the book of human wisdom lay revealed upon their hearts. The contents of the programme of late are toxic and the guests, more toxic. To expect morality from seasoned positions is to expect the rising of the Sun from not the west but South! Slumping after day's work before the idiotbox (TV) I began to watch some local drama serials. Little did I know what cultural shock I was to receive. There are at least three serials which are stated to be purely family dramas but not in the traditions of Haseena Moin's, or of the quality of Parchayian, Aangan Terra, etc. These are of present day and age. The scripts and playwright have contents that are socially obnoxious. The dialogues rarely meet the moral standards of our society, culture and traditions. Brazenness in speech is the hallmark of humility and politeness it appears. The plots of each are one of rebellion by off-springs against parents. The rebuke and disdain in conversations with parents and elders is pronounced. The youth falling into waywardness is prominent — in fact, sometimes it is glorified to actually make the impressionable age viewers to get tempted to enact the scenes in real life. At the drop of hat, children are seen threatening parents to leave their parental abodes. In every of those dramas, the attempted suicide on trivial issues is a high climax point. Are we selling suicide as a panacea for ills of life? Why so much screen space is being given to suicide scenes? Is it glorification or a sign of courage? What exactly is the message? The ennoblement of seeking relationships outside the ambit of religious and societal limitations is rampant; if for a moment, it was to be accepted as a happening thing in the society, what is the rate of incidence? Negligible. By projection with glamour and magnification, aren't we giving it a traction — an open invitation. From the decade of the 1980s and later, we have progressed. But is progress a reason to abandon the standards of morality, which are meant to be linchpin for the growth of society? The race to become wealthy without corresponding hard work or honesty is projected. 'There can be no civility without a deep morality, though it may not always call itself by that name' and, 'The evolution of a highly destined society must be moral; it must run in the grooves of the celestial wheels' ( Ralph Walton Emerson). As hapless citizens we are caught between the toxic political talk shows and the despicable contents of several dramas. How much can we force people to watch National Geographic or Animal Planet? The impelling question is why this slide into moral degradation? Why is the immoral behaviour being given a status and exaltation? This must cease. All sections of society must play a role to recover our traditions of morality and nobility. Progress is being confused with liberation from cultural standards of moral behaviour. Let there be rejuvenation of our unique standards of noble behaviour. 'The nation's morals are like its teeth: the more decayed the more it hurts to touch them' (George Bernard Shaw). Copyright Business Recorder, 2025


Express Tribune
27-06-2025
- Express Tribune
Order out of chaos
Listen to article Master disclaimer: If I manage to cover all disclaimers in this piece, I will get to the core of my argument today. Otherwise, perhaps I will rename it Disclaimers and leave it at that. But you will appreciate these disclaimers are necessary. First disclaimer: The phrase "order out of chaos" ("ordo ab chao" in Latin) is often attributed to the 33rd Scottish Rite Masonry. This piece has nothing to do with them. I use the phrase because it resonates with my message, as you will see. Second disclaimer: There is a beautiful quote attributed to Elizabeth Holmes, the disgraced founder of Theranos, a privately owned corporation once touted as a breakthrough health-tech company. It goes like this: "First they think you're crazy, then they fight you, and then all of a sudden you change the world." Upon closer inspection, it seems to be a paraphrase of the following statement, commonly misattributed to Mahatma Gandhi: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." In reality, this too is a rewording of a statement by Nicholas Klein, an American trade union activist speaking in 1918. Consider the statement: "First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you." I like all three versions because they correspond with my lived experience. The third disclaimer relates to one of my own recent positions. In my piece titled "Why states fear complexity", dated 14 September 2024, I pointed out that two forces — complexity and acceleration — were making societies too complicated to be governed by any state, resulting in the state's woefully inadequate responses like repression, spin, propaganda and moral pollution. Then I wrote: "With such state-driven projects to subvert and pervert all arguments, moral pollution will only add to complexity... States' reaction to this turf encroachment will not present a pretty sight." Then I suggested a remedy: "What can ordinary citizens do? The best disruption is the simplest — basic human decency. We can take charge of the future if all decent souls worldwide are vigilant. If you count yourself among them, wake up, be ready to use everything you have got, and watch this space." You are within your rights to complain that this is the context — where is the disclaimer? So here it is: I believe the simple remedy worked, and is still working. Now to my core argument today, albeit with some context. In my past columns, I have repeatedly pointed out that in his book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel Huntington was being manipulative rather than prescient. With the luxury of 20/20 hindsight, one can say that his chief purpose was to divide and prime the world for a clash that could conveniently be weaponised and used by his favoured groups and entities. I have also mentioned that while the direct impact of this sordid propaganda piece started to wane after the retirement of the Global War on Terror (GWOT) in 2017 — due to the emergent complexity of politics — two of its and GWOT's key beneficiaries and committed Islamophobes (India and Israel) clung to it as if their lives depended on it. While nations are bigger than ideologies, their ruling elites often are not. Especially when their rise to power and influence can be directly linked to such a virulent ideology or philosophy. Since the governments headed by Benjamin Netanyahu and Narendra Modi have repeatedly tried to reshape their respective countries' internal political structures and the global rule-based order through a clever use of Islamophobia — with diminishing returns and capacity — they have been growing restless. So, in the past sixty days, both nations initiated dangerous wars. India attacked Pakistan. Israel attacked Iran. Their sense of entitlement has been informed by their experiences spanning decades. Since Kargil in 1999, India has felt that most of its claims are taken at face value. After 9/11, this trend was solidified. In 2016, it claimed the Uri incident was perpetrated by Pakistan-backed militants, against whom it had carried out a surgical strike. The world did not see any reason to dispute either claim. In 2019, on the cusp of a national election, it again blamed Pakistani militants and claimed to have carried out aerial strikes — again, without much proof. No disputes there either. The international media only questioned the claim about downing an F-16. This time, everything changed. Likewise, Netanyahu did the same. Since the ghastly attacks of 7 October 2023, he has launched a forever war. Gaza, then Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. But forever wars need superpower-level resources, which Israel lacks. So, his recent attack on Iran was an attempt to externalise the forever war by dragging the US into it. But through his cleverly calculated moves, President Trump demolished that attempt. The question is: what changed? The first reason: the law of diminishing returns. If you destroy the international rule-based system to such an extent that it can do nothing about your atrocities in Gaza or Kashmir, then the very order which rescued you repeatedly in the past can no longer come to your rescue. You got greedy and slew the golden goose. The second reason is even simpler. It speaks to the nature of complexity I flagged earlier. While the inner workings of everything are getting complex, their end result is a simpler interface. For instance, you once needed knowledge and practice to code, make music, or create videos. Now you tell AI what you want and, with some refinement, it delivers results. The same goes for narratives. If you keep calling out propaganda, prejudice, and manipulations consistently and clearly, people begin to listen. Again, this is my lived experience. You need coherence and credibility, not sophisticated perception management. Just tell people what you hear and see. Since they can relate to your estimation of the objective truth, they pay attention. Now the question is: where do we go from here? These two elements are down but not out. If they can be convinced that the age of spin and conspiracy is over, the world can take a beautiful turn. But will they? Sadly, there are few signs that they will. In fact, they might want to hurt President Trump. In their diminished capacity, Indians are already trying to do that. But Mr Trump is what Nassim Nicholas Taleb calls 'antifragile', growing with every attempt to undermine him. Perhaps after such outdated tactics are exhausted, they may discover a better world is possible: one where all prejudices — Islamophobia, Christianophobia, antisemitism, Hinduphobia — are equally repulsive, and we can all progress in harmony. Order out of chaos, perhaps!