Finding Stability on a Spectrum
Contrary to popular opinion, it is not always easy to find stability on current issues. In my mind, one of the most difficult things to do, is to find stability on spectral issues. First, let me define what a spectral issue is. I think that a spectral issue is one, where no clear boundary exists between right and wrong, and that any boundary placed on that issue is somewhat arbitrary and is based on a heap of assumptions.
Let’s take a simple issue for illustrative purposes. The legal age for one to purchase and consume alcohol in the United States is 21. Why is it 21? Some might say that it is a matter of emotional and social maturity, yet others might say that it is a matter of physical maturity and development. However, when scrutinized, the 21st birthday is fairly arbitrary. Does it really make sense that a 21 year old can go to a bar and buy a drink and that a 20 year and 364 day old cannot? It simply does not make sense from a logical standpoint. However, this is where things get thorny. Do we reduce the drinking age to 18? Do we reduce it to 16? What would those ages really mean in the grand scheme of things?
This issue of stability on a spectrum can be found in issues with more passionate opposers and supporters. For example, an ongoing, spectral problem is abortion and how it fits into our larger, societal paradigm. As a caveat, I must say that I have no passionate opinions on the issue. I see it as largely a women’s issue, and I regret that our system is set up in a way that a bunch of fat, white, bureaucratic suits are making the decisions that affect this issue. Now, on to the issue: Let us assert that a fetus is not a human. When should the cut of be for aborting the child? Most people cringe at the thought of partial birth abortions, but how is a partial birth abortion different than aborting the baby a week prior to birth? Let’s say the suffering of the fetus is the primary concern. This would mean that early term abortions are ethical because the fetus does not suffer from the procedure. Well then, how much pain is considered an acceptable level. If the fetus experiences some pain, but very little, is this ethical?
I do not claim solve the complexity of these issues, but I do want to illustrate just how complex they really are. I also hope to outline some guidelines to approach these issues. Many people can agree on the nature of the ends of a spectrum. For example, partial birth abortions are largely abhorred, but throwing away a barely fertilized egg is largely accepted. It is when we approach the middle of the spectrum when we begin to lose stability. How can we approach these issues. I think that one way would be to prioritize ideals and then come to a conclusion based on those ideals.
For example, you can make a list of things to be considered and then prioritize that list. I’ll illustrate this with the issue of the legal age to consume alcohol.
Things to be considered:
Societal impact
Freedom of the individual
Physical well being of the individual
A hypothetical, prioritized list:
1. Freedom of the individual
2. Societal impact
3. Physical well being of the individual
Now based on this list, one would find a stance on the spectrum that she/he thinks holds true to all of what he/she thinks are important points to consider, but in the order of their priority. Priority 1 should be given most weight and decreasing weight should be allotted to the lesser priorities.
Many people do this automatically in their minds, but once it is put on paper, it helps to untangle the complexity that exists within these issues. Hopefully we can reduce passion and increase logic in regards to these issues. This will ideally lead to more stability on the spectrum.
Your comments will be appreciated! Do you have a better approach to the issue of spectrum? Is there a book or paper that deals with this issue and does it more justice than I can? I look forward to hearing from you.