We’re Off the Hook: Morality Doesn’t Demand Perfection

The argument in this essay relies on one main premise: that the moral agent is always allowed to do what they would reasonably believe to be the most morally correct action.  The acceptance of this principle, when combined with the empirical fact that no agent in the real world can ever know the full extent of the situation in which he is placed, will lead to the conclusion that it is not reasonable (under any moral system) to require that a moral agent always perform the universally rightest action (see following paragraph).  Although this seems to be common sense, it by definition allows for exceptions in the requirements of morality.  If an action is the universally rightest action, and yet is not required by any cohesive moral system, it goes to show that no cohesive moral system requires its agents to be perfect – thus lowering the demandingness bar of morality the first inch.

In any given situation, morally speaking, there is always a single “most right” action for an agent in that situation to take.  This is true because, no matter which moral system you adhere to, there will always be only one action available in any situation that will ultimately lead to the most adherence overall to that moral system.  This may mean searching eons into the future to find all possible results of the action, or exploring deeply every nuance of the situation to determine all morally relevant factors but there are are no two actions that have perfectly identical moral value.  In that sense, the action that in reality would lead to the most adherence to the moral system overall is the “most right” action possible, at least according to that moral system.  This action is the universally rightest action.

The harshest followers of a moral system would say that any action short of the universally rightest action, is in fact a wrong action.  Strict utilitarians, for example, might claim that it is wrong to take any action short of that which ultimately leads to the greatest overall happiness.  However, many object to this uncompromising implementation of a moral theory on the grounds that it is “too demanding.”  I am one of these objectors – in even the most generalized moral theory, it occurs quite often that the universally rightest action is not an option that it is within the grounds of reason for the agent to take.