Morals. We all have them, we all have reasons for them, but they are all completely different. Morals are created through so many varying factors and experiences, that they're distinctly subjective to each person. So how do we speak about morality if we all have our own ideas of what it consists of? How do we label people as “being moral” if there is no set definition? How do we act morally as a society if all of our personal morals are different?
I’m just going to say this now, I don’t know. I also don’t know if there actually is a definitive answer to these questions. But as a group, we explored some of these tough dilemmas.
Our first reaction was to watch our own morals before pointing fingers at someone else’s. The truth isn’t always objective; it’s a hard boat to navigate. Instead of judging others’ beliefs, we should focus on the energy we put out into the world. Gavin gave us a great mantra to practice: persistently perfecting a positive perspective. Imagine if everyone just focused on being their best self instead of criticizing others? What a different world we would live in.
In addition, we came to the conclusion that conflicting morals don’t always have to create negative experiences. They give us room to bend and grow, instead of being stuck knee deep in the sticky swamp we call our ego. When we are open to civil debate and discussion, we can escape this stagnancy and begin to understand each other. We all want to feel like we're heard and understood. Isn’t it better to live in harmony instead of havoc?