Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1886-04-04

But it is far from us to limit Morals
to this shrunken meaning. To explain
what we mean, then, by the words right
and wrong" let us illustrate:
Men for thousands of years used the
words ''up" and down" with reference
to themselves and the consequence was
confusion; what was up" to one in one
place was clown" to him in another
place. 1t is only few hundred years
back that we commenced to comprehend
the real, the scientific meaning of the
terms: that down means towards the
center Of the earth, up" away from that
center, and that to one suspended in
space there is absolutely no "up' and no
clown"
In the same way theoIogians presumed
TO tell mankind that good and dad"
actions were to be judged from their eff
fects upon the destiny of the actor.
Sins that were scarlet could therefore
under certain circumstances be made
white like snow.
Science, and with it Socialism, which
bases itself on the verities of things,
teaches that there would be no morality
at all if man did not need his fellowman
that right" and wrong" have reference,
primarily, not to the individual actor,
Ian tIt a ltA al
ciety.
Gambling is wrong, is immoral, not
because it tends to the ruin of the gam
bier, but because he cannot win unless
somebody loses; because gambling,
thus, sears the sympathies and, therefore,
is essentially anti-social.
Right" is every conduct which tends
to the welfare of Society; wrong" what
obstructs that welfare. Bad actions are
no longer "sins," but "crimes," and
crimes can never he white as snow.
Now, human beings have already
learned by experience that they must act
III certain way under penalty of being
unable to act together at all; that Society
could not e,cia at all without integrity;
that it could not progress without sym
pathy. We may call integrity the basis
and sympathy the crown of Morals.
1t will be seen that there is no such
thing as absolute, interchangeable morality.
| 'I,n 10 1t IN, In y,Nf
Society evidently require different stand
ards; what was right at one period may
be eminently wrong at later period.
Thus, if Slavery was, indeed, the first
necessary step of our civilization, the
first lesson i'll cooperation, we must pro
nounce Slavery to have been right then
and the fact that the best men of an
tiquity: Socrates, Jesus, Aristotle, ac-
guessed in it tends to prove it so-how-
ever wrong it appears in the light of a
higher morality. 1t also will be seen,
that morals is truly science, a very
subtle science, as it involves a correct
philosophy of Society, its tendencies and
destiny. Is it any wonder that morals
has hitherto been tissue of rhetorical
and emotional commonplaces Before
anybody can say what is right" conduct,
and whether he is truly "moral" man
or not, he must possess all the knowledge
and mental development which we have
assumed will be the portion of everybody
when the New Social Order is in full
swing
But to know what is right" is only
one side of the great subject, rather the
reverse than itsssfront side.
The writer of this once listened to very
interesting address by Carroll d. Wright,
the head Of the Labor Bureau of Massa-
chusetts, on ''our factory system, the
leading thought Of which was, that our
industrial system would be unobjection-
able If both parties, employers and. EN-
ployes, would only go down to the foun-
dation and be led by morality and re-
ligion.
Therein turks fundamental mistake,
Col. Wright.
Morals are not the foundation, still less
religion. They are the top of our sys-
tenn. lnterest-self interest lis the foun-
datlon, the prime motor the handspring
of our actions; 50 it is, has always been,
and will always be.
why should do this thing ?" "why
should not gambler" has always been
the great practical question, and not lis