Rules: A Least Common Denominator for Morality.

Rules are like mini political talking points: they don't say much but give us a standard around which to form teams.

Rules, as it turns out, are best when they are (and in) black and white. This saves us from thinking to hard about the cloudy areas they overlook.

Rules give us simple answers to complex issues; they form meaning from the gray.

Best of all: they define boundaries over which we can wage our ethical wars.

---

Human beings are complex moral fruit flies, and unless you cut off our arms and legs we don't fit well into boxes.

When we don't have rules determining the rallying cries of our ethical discussions we must continually provide backup information to clarify what we are saying. Even with this information, we will check back regularly - "Do you see where I'm coming from?" - to make sure our fellow conversees are keeping up. When there is a rule attached to the discussion, we do a lot less checking-in. We use short definite phrases like: "It's against the law," "It's a woman's right," "I was first in line!" We don't feel the need to check-in because there is an understanding that whatever we're talking about has exactly two familiar sides. All we're doing then is verbalizing where we stand relative to the standard.

No matter how cumbersome and unrepresentative they may be, we evoke rules, laws and social codes to lend weight to the most basic of our opinions. Despite being a cheap substitute for thought, there is a more dangerous issue at play when you argue from these rigid, codified perspectives. The rules you cite are not specific to your situation and carry their own weight, prejudice and subtext with them wherever they go. Statutory rape, for instance, means something quite different when referring to an incestuous uncle than it does when you're talking about an 18 year old senior in high school dating a 17 year old senior in high school. Rules touch on the theme but in no way get to the heart of the issue.

Please, don't misunderstand me: I'm not a rebel who hates authority and thinks rules are made to be broken. On the contrary, they should be neither obeyed nor disobeyed.

Rules should be politely ignored and substituted with our own morality.

Only then will we be able to have honest discussions about real issues. Only then will see our own hypocrisy reflected in the judgment we have passed on others. Only then will we be forced to evaluate ethical decisions for ourselves instead of turning blind eyes to injustice while falling back on whatever scaffolding was there when we arrived.

It might keep us from confusing ethical laziness with moral virtue.

It might help us see the gray

for gray.