Nature of Reality

Hinduism's Bhagavad Gita is an excellent example of the profound effect that perceived nature of reality can have on moral construct. The text begins with Arjuna on the brink of war and in a moral crisis. His enemy happens to be a cousin tribe, and the ensuing battle will certainly kill many of his relatives. He is paralyzed, unable to rank his kingdom's conquest above his good will for his extended relations.

He seeks permission from Krishna (his god) to stop the battle. Krishna responds with a mini-lecture on the nature of reality. He explains that the body can be killed, but the true self cannot and that the most important thing for Arjuna to do is carry out his duty as a warrior, with a sense of detatchment.

By explaining an "extra-mortal" nature of reality, Krishna is able to help Arjuna lower the stakes of engaging in a bloody battle. Moral choices seem to involve a ranking of values. Krishna's sermon teaches Arjuna to rank duty over life... a ranking that has great potential for producing immoral behavior in a construct that ranks life first.

This text was formational to both Oppenheimer and Gandhi, so obviously the degree of literal interpretation that one takes has a profound effect on the application, but they both found great resolve to act outside their contemporary paradigms, presumably because their personal understanding of reality covered different ground than the status quo. The concept of "right" or "moral" must be located on the map of the way things "really" are, and so conversations on the nature of reality are foundational to any definition of moral behavior.

Can you think of examples of shifting values based of paradigm shift/expansion in other religious or philosophical constructs?

The concept of Dharma (duty) is also very interesting from a moral standpoint, but I'll save that for another post.