Theory of Knowledge

"Mommy, she took my toy. Make her give it back." This is a statement heard far too often in my house. Usually, this complaint is followed by a tired mother demanding the return of the toy, but sometimes she asks "why can't you two share your toys?" My mother is taking the first steps in teaching my sisters not to be selfish, but why? Why shouldn't my sisters be selfish? why shouldn't they lie, or cheat? Why should they come eat with the family? Why shouldn't they trap birds in the back yard? The answers to these questions can't be found in any textbook (though the public education system has tried to put them there), but I think that these questions are just as important, if not more so, than the questions that we might answer in math or science. The answers come from all areas of knowing, and must be evaluated through all of them to come to any valid conclusions.
In the case of my sisters' squabbles, my mother would usually say that they shouldn't be selfish, and should share their toys, but there are times when this isn't the answer that she would give. For example, if the toy was breakable, or the child playing with it was in trouble already, she might just say "Give the toy back now, or else." This discrepancy between answers is confusing, to say the least. After all, if I asked you what two plus two is, you would always answer "four," so why should my mother's answers be different? Neither one is considered to be a lie, but both answers are notably different. This would imply that the situation we're in determines wether or not we should be selfish. For example, most people you ask will say that it is wrong to loot grocery stores, yet thousands of people in New Orleans did just that without any major police action taken against them. However, society says that this is acceptable since this took place shortly after hurricane Katrina ravaged the south coast, leaving stores deserted and people hungry.
Besides being a question about selfishness, this situation also brings to mind some moral issues. It would seem that the question of wether one should be moral and starve, or be immoral and eat becomes an easy one when you're starving to death, but many people don't like these ‘immoral' choices. This situation also raises the question of what morals are, after all. Dictionary.com says that moral means "1. Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior, 2. Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous, [or] 3. Arising from conscious or the sense of right and wrong." This means that making moral decisions means doing what's right according to society and to yourself. The last definition points out that morals require one to be aware of what is right and wrong, and the other two definitions require a knowledge of ‘what is right or just,' or ‘goodness or correctness of character or behavior.' This makes it very difficult to establish a correct answer to the question: "should I be moral?" since morals change depending on how you define them. Despite this uncertainty, society is constantly trying to convince us that we should be moral, and it goes on to describe what morality is. In my town this year, there is a program called "Character Ed," that is designed to promote moral growth in the community. Each month, local businesses are asked to publicize a word, like ‘Responsibility,' or ‘Caring,' in order to promote this characteristic in the people of our city. My question is this: is this program actually changing anyone? We can read the definition of "Caring" over and over again, but if we've never known anyone who truly cared about us, what does it mean? Morals aren't something that can be identified by encouraging vocabulary, and moral questions can't be answered from a definition.
The complexity of the answers of these questions doesn't make them any less important to the world. In fact, many of these questions could be considered more important than many questions that we all know the answer to. Many people really care how many minutes are in a year, but the question of how we should live those 525,600 minutes is one that everyone must face at some point. Questions with undetermined answers appear in virtually all of the areas of knowledge. Mathematics and natural sciences investigate how make people's lives ‘better,' human sciences investigate people's decisions regarding these difficult questions, and why they made these decisions, in history we look at others' decisions from the past and observe how well they worked out, art is used to present these questions to people, and ethics present and create many of these questions.
My town's effort to remind people of moral values through language is a starting point in answering the questions in each of these areas of knowing that are left with no definite answer. Language helps us express ourselves so that our decisions make a difference in the end, and we can be reminded of what our decision was in a real and tangible way. Some may think that it's difficult to use reason to answer questions that have no clear answer, but it is actually a vital part of the decision-making process still. For example, the Golden Rule tells us to ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' This makes sense logically, because it not only makes others happier, since you are treating them well, but if everyone adopts this philosophy, then everyone would be respected, and happier, or would at least be treated with kindness. Emotion plays a major part in making subjective decisions. It is difficult to think about these decisions if you're feeling angry or euphoric, but at the same time, these emotions in moderation can help the process. Becoming angry about an injustice could lead you to make an effort to change it, and personal euphoria can make you more enthusiastic about sharing that happiness with others in an unselfish way. Last, but certainly not least, perception plays a great role in decision-making. Perception can help you determine the situation at hand, and what your situation should be at that time. Since these questions don't have definitive answers, this is probably the most important of the ways of knowing involved in these decisions.
Questions without answers are illustrated in a wide variety of places. In Huckleberry Finn, Huck struggles with the choice of wether to turn Jim in, or to be a friend and let him go, and finally decides to go against what society says is ‘right,' going so far as to say that he'd even go to hell for it. The song Seasons of Love in Rent asks "how do you measure, measure a year? In daylights, in sunsets, in midnights, in cups of coffee, in inches, in miles, in laughter, in strife? Five hundred, twenty five thousand six hundred minutes, how do you measure, measure a life? How about love?" Bowling for Columbine, the popular documentary, asked Americans why we're so violent. To attract as much attention as these works received, these questions must be meaningful, but none of them can be answered by circling A or B, or filling in a blank. These questions' lack of definitive answers hasn't affected their impact on the world, though. In fact, these questions have probably made a greater impact than many questions that you can answer True or False. They certainly meant more to Mark Twain, Jonathan Larson, and Michael Moore.
So, when my mom tells my little sisters not to be selfish and to share their toys, she's planting in them a question that will hopefully linger in their minds their entire lives: why shouldn't I be selfish? This question, along with countless others, can't be answered in a text book, with a single, heartwarming word, or on a multiple choice test, no matter how hard we try to reduce it to that, but this doesn't make it any less important. A question like these that is being asked by every human being, in every area of knowledge can't be insignificant, and is, in fact, more significant than many of the questions with concrete answers that we ask every day. So ask yourself; What does it really mean to be ‘caring'? How do you measure, measure a year? Why should I be moral? Is looting ever OK? and, what is two plus two?