Politics is wrapped in the narrative that we are suffering through a moral decline. Turns out, that is NOT true, so quit fretting. Nature.com published a study a few weeks back that not only disputed the narrative of a moral decline but also offered up the factors that push people to believe it: Biased Exposure: People are predominantly exposed to the bad stories of others (if it bleeds it leads) Biased Memory: Bad things fade faster than good things leaving a more favorable view of the past Those two biases fool people into the belief that everyone else is suffering and they themselves used to live in an easier and happier time, and there it is… things seem worse and everything is in moral decline. Plays well in politics. The illusion of moral decline | Nature Anecdotal evidence indicates that people believe that morality is declining1,2. In a series of studies using both archival and original data (n = 12,492,983), we show that people in at least 60 nations around the world believe that morality is declining, that they have believed this for at least 70 years and that they attribute this decline both to the decreasing morality of individuals as they age and to the decreasing morality of successive generations. Next, we show that people’s reports of the morality of their contemporaries have not declined over time, suggesting that the perception of moral decline is an illusion. Finally, we show how a simple mechanism based on two well-established psychological phenomena (biased exposure to information and biased memory for information) can produce an illusion of moral decline, and we report studies that confirm two of its predictions about the circumstances under which the perception of moral decline is attenuated, eliminated or reversed (that is, when respondents are asked about the morality of people they know well or people who lived before the respondent was born). Together, our studies show that the perception of moral decline is pervasive, perdurable, unfounded and easily produced. This illusion has implications for research on the misallocation of scarce resources3, the underuse of social support4 and social influence5.
So the evil, underachievement, corruption, and shit we're drowning in is nothing new, meaning we are incapable of evolving beyond it. What a cheery thing.
You act as if it is all around you every day. You have 24 media blasting you with jaded and distorted perspectives and it gives you the perception that is the world we live in. I highly doubt people of yesteryear were dramatically more virtuous. Human nature is human nature. People did some pretty cruel shit decades ago. Corruption at high levels is nothing new. If anything with the intense attention and visibility it is probably not as rampant as it was in the past.
I know we're not declining morally. 90 years ago, antisemitism was rampant, and we were far too willing to look the other way as Jews were persecuted and slaughtered in Europe. 60 years ago, Jim Crow still existed. 40ish years ago, gay people were treated as second-class citizens, and our government was happy to let them die of AIDS. Now, segregation is a distant memory, we have little tolerance for antisemitism, and the laws that denied gay people equal citizenship are mostly gone. There are still many wrongs to right, injustices happening today, and improvements needed, but we as a society are certainly progressing. Progress isn't always linear, but it is happening.
Why even get up in the morning? How about a crime rate near 40 year lows? Maybe that will inspire you.
Or corruption and evil, while still rampant is a bit better thanks to checks and balances. Time to highlight the good. This message brought to you by the Christmas Season.
We can assess changes in moral behavior objectively, if arbitrarily, but there simply is no way to objectively judge a single moral state. It’s like asking if a mile is long. As Epictetus noted a couple thousand years ago, it’s not events that disturb people, but their judgements concerning them. If our morals haven’t changed over generations, then it would seem that the most objective way to describe them would be “average.”
Id argue that if you look a real statistics it would point to a significantly more moral society. Poverty rates, minority employment rates, crime rates, access to equal rights. Now charity rates are modern low due to the pandemic but most of those cuts came from education, religion, and environment... not poverty fighting. Incarceration rates are high for males but that is related to sentencing and not crimes. Basically almost any stat suggests people are more moral.... except if you ask people. They say they are fine and so are the people they know.. but others suck.
I mean.. .who can forget all those wars fought by atheists? I mean there was... um... i'll get back to you.
I don't think we are necessarily a more "moral," maybe a better word would be less cruel. Empathetic is probably more accurate, which is probably more down to advancements in media making the world "smaller" than advances in morality, our ideas of which are largely unchanged. The circle of people we see as worthy of empathy as has widened.
Begs the question... are people more moral if they act more moral due to the consequences? i.e being canceled or convicted of discriminating.
I think our attitudes are largely shaped by material and political conditions, and I think there is a certain amount of conformity in how that works, social censure being among those ways conformity is shaped, but usually there is some sort of material or political condition preceding that which allows for that. Capitalism certainly allowed for the triumph of bourgeois morality, "the protestant ethic" and all that.
Illusion? Baloney. I've been in moral decline for years. There's no question about it. I was raised as a Southern Baptist fundamentalist. I was glory-bound, "once saved, always saved." Then I left home and went to UF. It's been a downward slope to depravity ever since.
Anytime I start thinking we are in decline I just think back to how degenerate we were in middle and high school.