Without attempting to sidetrack this thread. A deeper question needs to be asked before addressing what the nature of human morality, ethics and ideals are all about.
Where did morals come from? Where did these guidelines come from? How did they develop?
Many will say religion and that is true. But there are cultures and people completely cut off from the usual Abrahamic religions and the Dharmic religions of the East.
ie the people of the Americas, who developed some very similar moral standards to ours, their concepts of life were also somewhat similar, their ideas of religion mirrored the rest of the world in some ways.
Where did humanity make that leap from being survivalist to developing rules and ideas meant for groups, loyalties and so on?
Yes.
I think education is a measure of all that you mentioned. But this statement is conditional.
Let me explain:
1.Traditional societies without education and more rural are more ethical/moral/social law abiding than transitional societies. In traditional societies, the concept/institution of honour and shame forces people to behave in a socially acceptable manner by and large.
2. Transitional societies - where the population is split between educated and non educated, urban and rural.
These societies have highest problems of morality, legality among other things.
This is because in such societies, the educated find ways and loopholes to exploit the non educated. Those with malafide intentions(rich or poor, educated or uneducated) are able to carry out their agendas because there is no instrument of control over them.
The old institutions of honour, face & shame are diluted and even removed as people in urban centers don't have their relatives or are relatively more anonymous than in traditional societies like villages. Thus old restrictions/instruments of control are no longer binding on the people as they used to be.
And the new Institutions of the State which though present and meant to effectively replace the old social institutions of honour/shame and are meant to deter those who have malafide intentions, are not effective. This is because the institutions of such States are also not fully developed and are thus used for exploitation as well.
Thus morality/rule of law/etc is lowest in such societies compared to traditional societies and developed/completely educated societies.
3. Developed/Completely educated societies - Majority of the people here are educated, know their rights, also know what to demand of state institutions and force them to act, thus making state institutions become competent and capable and deter those who have malafide intentions.
------------------------------------------
Now countries like India and Pakistan are in phase 2 ie Transitional societies.
So Society type 1 - ie the Traditional Society looks better because it had better behaviour, better morality and better ethics.
However, the same would be achieved once countries like India and Pakistan get their population really educated and move towards Society type 3 - the Developed/Educated Society.
I can give so many many example of how institutions in India are slowly and one by one(yes, its that slow) becoming better because of fierce, massive public pressure and scrutiny on them. Ofcourse few get worse with time as well but they are much lesser in number.
But as more and more people in India are getting educated, society is evolving, people are literally forcing State Institutions to become better and provide better service. This is a fight as those at the top of the society want the institutions to keep being malafide, and so changing each institution is a whole new fight each time. But is it is happening right here.
And once a critical number of important Institutions in India become better, they will exert a powerful force that will make the rest of the institutions change faster.
Ask me and I will give you examples of the Institutions that have become better and worse in India to illustrate my point. And I can give you diverse examples from bad social behaviour like rape to judicial Institutions to electoral Institutions.
And this is exactly how the Western societies also developed. They underwent the same transitions. Their people also fought hard to change their institutions one by one till an eco-system of good institutions developed.
And the thing about this is, humans generally behave better/more humane when they feel that there is justice in the system. If you make the system better, the humans will also start becoming better which will make the institutions even better. Its a virtuous circle.
Similarly, there is also a vicious cycle. The people will become more brutal, barbaric, less ethical if the system starts failing them, then the system starts failing more because the people are becoming worse. No one can say what comes first, its a cumulative effect.
All this happens as more and more people get educated.
I must say, it's the first I've ever heard something like this but I commend you for such insight.
Wonderful.
And you're absolutely right, the development of the civil liberties of Europe was not bought about by magic, it was the blood and the will of the people. Probably the biggest step in that in my opinion was the French revolution.
The problem with Pakistan in particular is a backwards mindset of people. Honestly, as an expat, when I even sit down with some people, family members back home, they way we think is completely different, the thoughts we interpret differently. They for example don't value the idea that change in society is bought about by it's people, they look outward and expect the change come from elsewhere.
Another problem with Pakistanis is their view of morality, they feel that beyond what they know about their religion, there is no morality. This kind of thinking gives some in our society the ideas that as long as they pray 5 times a day, they grow beards and portray themselves as pious, their actions need not be changed. It's misunderstanding religion as a driving force of ethics and morality.
Here in Pakistan, when someone sees the ills of the world around them, rarely if ever have I seen them (PDF is an exception) look inward to change themselves and make the change around them, they will ask for a leader with an iron fist to hammer all the nails in to place, this leader can't be appointed by people either, oh no... he must miraculously swoop down from the sky.
Another question I have to ask myself is, is our culture compatible with the new world order?
We're living in an age where the evolution of knowledge and ideas is becoming exponential. How can society with such deep divides, one which lives practically in the outside world and one which hasn't tasted the outside world not disagree with each other, not conflict?
