Morals cannot be taught. Do you agree?

The statement “morals cannot be taught” suggests an intrinsic knowledge in every person of the rights and wrongs of society. It is based on the idea of an instinctive leaning in everyone toward either good or bad and a complete absence of any change as a result of external influence.

Morals exist as a definition of society. Society has dictated the correctness, the desirability of honesty, integrity – good behaviour. It is, thus, difficult to imagine societal conventions as instinctive. The concept of right and wrong is a matter of learning, and acquisition of knowledge. Thus, morals can be taught, and have to be, to a child.

A human baby is absolutely helpless and altogether undeveloped: its brain will more than double in size in its first year of life. he complexity of human behaviour has to be taught to these impressionable infants.

Because humans exist in such a complicated society, necessary social skills are definitely not present in such young minds. Babies and young children rarely behave correctly: they do not compromise and insist on asserting individual rights. Embarrassed parents are often observed ushering misbehaving children out of public places – the adults know full well their child is engaging in undesirable behaviour, but the child is often completely unaware of this.

The effect of familial influence on the morals of offspring is a widely accepted fact – the morals are obviously taught. The neglected young with no positive influence develop into adults with no clear sense of morals – a scenario often presented and shockingly true. Crime rates are linked to poverty levels – struggling parents are too exhausted or too benumbed to care what their young do for money, and with no one to correct their wrong behaviour, these people continue to err.

The behaviour of one’s parents, or any person of guiding influence, dictates the behaviour of oneself. A dishonest person, who thinks nothing of keeping for himself property lost by others, breeds children with the same pattern of thought, simply because the child would receive no message that such an act is wrong. Other examples abound, of similar evidence: an overwhelming 92% of pre-school age children surveyed in London last year displayed patterns of thought almost exactly similar to that of their parents.

The traditions of one’s culture also dictate one’s morals. For example, bigamy is frowned upon by many societies, for being morally reprehensible and violating the rights of women. However, other societies permit this, for example, Muslim men can have up to four wives, and harems were common among Eastern kings in history. Clearly, the established “morals” of monogamy are not instinctive: Muslim men who practice polygamy certainly are not repulsed by the idea of their many wives; polygamous men brought up to believe in monogamy will suffer feelings of guilt at having done wrong.

That morals are taught can be examined in a more interesting fashion, by observing people brought up outside the human community. In the early 1970s, an Indian researcher rescued a girl of eight, who had been brought up by a pack of wolves. While she cowered in his presence, she once leapt at a sleeping baby and snapped at its neck. She was clearly displaying wolf-like behaviour, of healthy respect for bigger animals, but the ruthless killing of weaker ones for food. The killing of a baby is seen as being wrong only by people taught that it is wrong.

The laws of society, and punishment for the violation of these laws, again refute the idea that morals cannot be taught. By reinforcing the established conventions of society’s morals, and inflicting punishment if wrong is done, the system seeks to inculcate moral values in the people, first by detailing what is wrong, then by a clear message that such wrongdoing will be punished.

Indeed, if morals cannot be taught, then what of the numerous campaigns launched by the government? These work by reiterating values as correct, so constantly and repetitively they become accepted as morals. Again, these exist as a reinforcement to those established by society.

Perhaps certain mentally limited individuals cannot be taught morals; certainly insanity is a valid plea in courts of law, admitting that such criminals are incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong. However, in the majority of the population, morals can be taught. Indeed, morals exist only because they are taught – by the family, by religious texts, by society. Morals are established by the society, for we decide what to believe is right or wrong, and have to teach our young accordingly.

With the rise of the Internet, has conventional media become obsolete?

Despite the pervasive influence of the Internet, traditional media still has a growing role. Conventional media continues to stay very popular and important in the daily lives of citizens. Many individuals still listen to the radio while driving to work, read the newspapers on their commute and of course, watch TV while cooking or during dinner with their family. But, over the last 20 years, the Internet and its ecosystem have taken up an important part within our society. This is particularly prominent amongst Generation Y and Z consumers. It would be a stretch to say that conventional media is obsolete. It may be perhaps a tad underused.

Interestingly, the number of hours spent watching television has gone up even in the age of the Internet. Cable TV has exploded with the number of programme offerings and reality TV shows that have captivated audiences for over 20 seasons. While it can be argued that Netflix and Amazon Prime have an increasing following, but these entertainment channels do not offer news, travel and other current affairs programmes. That said, most people prefer to watch Netflix on a large TV screen rather than a tablet or smartphone.

The Internet has changed direct mail quite significantly. Various service providers can provide targeted advertising online and payment only is made when a potential consumer clicks through. There are more avenues to track advertisements through built-in tools that track demographics, location and even the type of device through which the advertisement was seen. Brands are specifically targeting their ideal buyer rather selecting a broad market to bombard with their message. These brands are building relationships with these ideal buyers through increasingly powerful marketing strategies that foster trust in their product or service.

Blogs such as Daily Kos and The Huffington Post have gained credibility and large readerships over the past decade, forcing traditional journalists to blog and tweet in order to keep pace with the flow of the story. Traditional newspapers are also losing out to news aggregators such as Google News, which profit from providing links to journalists’ stories at major newspapers without offering financial compensation to either the journalists or the news organizations. Many newspapers have adapted to the Internet out of necessity, fighting falling circulation figures and slumping advertising sales by offering websites, blogs, and podcasts. The relative success of new media companies such as ViceBuzzfeed, and Vox – and the fact that some of their largest backers are from the old guard.

The power and influence of conventional media is slowing waning. But a lot of work needs to be put in place to ensure that new media can eclipse old media and create a shining pathway for governments, businesses and consumers. One vital aspect is ensuring proper laws are in place to prevent fake news and to protect free speech. Secondly, censorship and regulation of content has to be more acceptable as a way of producing quality content that helps society grow.  While these issues may create some set-backs for new media, it is nevertheless increasing in popularity and accessibility by leaps and bounds.

The efforts to save the environment is the responsibility of developed nations. Discuss.

The destructive bushfires of Australia in 2019 gained widespread media attention. Many discussions and debates talked about various causes which led to the disaster. One recurring theme in all these debates was man-made climate change. Environmental damage can also be seen in the arctic, where melting snow has led to the death of polar bears. It is estimated that polar bears will go extinct in ten years if nothing is done to help preserve their environment. These incidents prove that the efforts to save the environment have not materialised into reality yet. One of the reasons for this is that many believe that developed nations should shoulder the responsibility of conserving the environment as they are better equipped to do so. From a practical perspective, developed nations should shoulder the efforts to save the environment as they have been the main culprits in its destruction.

Developed nations should conserve the environment because they have better resources financially and technologically. Many developed countries have already taken steps to mitigate environmental problems in multiple ways. One of the ways developed nations have adopted is the construction of buildings with ample of green spaces. An example of this can be seen in Singapore, throughout its architecture it encourages the inclusion of plants and trees. Private buildings like Oasia Hotel in downtown Singapore is coated in greenery. The Singapore government is also focusing on planting new trees and preserving mature ones to make housing estates greener, sustainable and more liveable. Similarly, in Chicago, the City Hall Roof which is practically a garden boasts of various flowering plants and bushes. The roof was made to serve as an example for other buildings in the state. It also was made in an attempt to combat rising temperature and improve air quality. The Chicago green roof fulfilled all these goals which is evident from the fact that more than 400 green rooftops are constructed since then. Thus, developed nations are better equipped to save the environment because they have the technology and finances to assist them in this endeavour which many countries do not possess.

Developed nations are primary contributors to environmental damage due to their large-scale industrial activity. Apart from that, the per capita consumption patterns are also very high in the developed world. Thus, these developed countries should take ownership and mitigate the effects of environmental damage. There are companies in the developed world that are taking measures to prevent environmental damage. An example, of this, can be Coco-Cola company that has adopted environmental-friendly practices like conservation of freshwater rivers and sourcing their ingredients from sustainable sources. The company is also set to make changes to its packaging by introducing recyclable plastic bottles. Similarly, IKEA, a furniture company, through its Live Lagom project, encouraged its customers and employee live in a more sustainable way by sourcing sustainable products and only adding furniture to their home when it’s truly beneficial. These efforts by international companies help in making the world a greener and better place. Thus, developed nations have to play a larger role in promoting the efforts to save the environment.

However, it should be noted that developing countries today are mainly responsible for environmental damage as they are undergoing industrial developments. In the future too, it is the current rapidly developing nations that will be the primary contributors to global warming. However, developing nations too could undertake efforts to mitigate environmental damage. An example of this can be the North African country of Morocco, that has successfully shown the will to mitigate climate change by committing to produce electricity through renewable energy sources by 2020. Another country, Brazil has developed innovative products like plastic made from sustainable materials like sugar cane ethanol. This plastic is considered to help in reducing emissions and minimising environmental damage.  Similarly, developing countries are also focusing on ecotourism to protect the environment. An example of this is the country of Belize, which is focusing on eco-tourism and is protecting and preserving its natural environments and exotic wildlife. The Belize Barrier Reef is conserved and protected and is an important place which promotes biodiversity. Thus, developing countries can also take efforts and play a part in environmental conservation.

In conclusion, there is no denying that developed countries are better off financially and technologically in mitigating issues related to the environment. However, it is unfair to expect that all the efforts to save the environment should be taken by the developed countries. This is because the task is a Herculean one which requires efforts from all countries and stakeholders. Therefore, everyone is instrumental in preventing environmental degradation. Therefore, while the efforts to save the environment lies in the hands of all the stakeholders, developed countries should shoulder the main responsibility.