Using if in a directive

There is a huge difference between saying you should do something full stop rather than; you should do something, if.

You can tell people that they should take the blue road if they want to reach a particular place in the easiest quickest way possible. We may also tell those about to make this journey that the red route is the shortest and if they have time on their hands there is a country road option too. Some worry about getting stuck on the blue road. Some are keen to keep the mileage down to a minimum and care little for the traffic lights and congestion. It is much simpler to say, “take it from me the blue road is the quickest”. Going through all the possible routes is time consuming. Aside from the brevity, we highlight what we ourselves tend to do and encourage others to do the same.

should-photo-small

Note the irony. Telling people how we should be careful with the use of the should word. This book is full of ideas about life and attempts to steer clear of telling you what to do. I say attempts, as you will spot quite a few things that are not exactly impartial or as balanced as they could be. It is an aim rather than anything else. Even saying that this is what we can do, can be read as what we ought to do.

Not every language has a should word in its vocabulary. The lack of the ‘should’ word might mean that people use body language instead, or a change in voice tone to hint at what someone should do. Perhaps people either do something or they don't.

A healthy discussion will involve people voicing their opinions. Lots will say what they think should be done. People will tell others what they think they ought to be doing, but how many are mindful of where their opinion comes from. The only principle that comes close to being accepted by all, is having the decency to listen to others. Yet people have a firm opinion on everything, believing they are doing everything right and expect others to follow suit.

Our parents can be adamant that doing certain things may be foolish. We go against their advice and find it to be the best thing ever. Not always, but sometimes we find our own way, running counter to what we are told is the best. However, an orderly household may need some rules laid out with clear boundaries set. Hence, we tell our children what they ought to be doing, when and how. We may dislike being told how we should do things but there are practical realities to consider. An employer will also feel at liberty to tell their workers how they should do things.

We could lead by example. Some may copy us. Some may choose to ignore how we do things. It takes a lot of restraint to not say something when we see someone doing something that is obviously dangerous, inefficient or stupid. Nevertheless, I have respect for people that give others the chance to make mistakes for themselves, letting them enjoy the rewards from learning, improving.

Every nation has its own set of laws, each with many flaws. No diktat is followed by everyone the world over. With so many contrary opinions abound, not everyone can be right. On balance, your method, your teachings are most likely to be representative of a minority when you take the population of the whole world into account. Yet some have the arrogance to think they are following the correct path. There may well be genuinely good reasons for doing what you do but you ignore genuinely good alternatives.

As for morality? Morality is nothing more than a personal construct. It is a list of our own opinions and personal preferences. Morality is opinion. It changes as we see more of the world. We add bits and become more flexible when we get to understand the deeper issues at stake. Our morality gains finesse over time with exceptions and exclusions added. In any moral maze we have those with differing opinions based on their moral code, their moral beliefs. There is no universal morality. People attempt to formulate a moral framework that can be used by all. The first port of call is to find an abhorrent act that everyone agrees is morally reprehensible. From there they believe we can work inwards to set out a grand moral vision. They fail at the first step because they do not acknowledge that morality is, as said before, a personal construct. It is what we see, never what everyone sees, as right and wrong. Dropping a nuclear bomb on civilians is morally wrong. No, it is not. In your opinion it is wrong. Dropping such a bomb will invoke capitulation and an end to the war. This will save more lives overall, especially the lives of our troops. Thus, it is morally acceptable. No, it is not. In your opinion it is morally right.

Opinions are derived from preferences. You may prefer to go it alone, others like people to focus on supporting one another as a group. You may prefer to share when it suits you to share rather than be forced to share. That is a fundamental difference in preference. That difference in preference leads to a difference in opinion about how a society should operate. Some want us to share all we have with the rest of society; others want forced sharing with others kept to a minimum; their family is their priority.