Adults think the darnedest things.
Last week we wrote from the perspective of Aristotelian morality. For a recap of his moral theories, click here; it will give more context to comparisons of Aristotle’s eudaimonia, which will aid in the overall understanding of this week’s theory of morality. This week, we will be writing from the perspective of the Nahuas, or the Aztecs who spoke Nahuatl in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, drawing on L. Sebastian Purcell’s “Eudaimonia and Neltiliztli: Aristotle and the Aztecs on the Good Life” (2017).
Like Aristotle, the Nahuas’ moral theories are based in virtue ethics, or the idea that character is an important component of morality. Rather than Aristotle’s theory of eudaimonia, or working towards a flourishing life as the best way of life, the Nahuas work towards rootedness. Rootedness means taking root in one’s body, mind, soul, and teotl, or earth. In the modern day, taking root may mean finding stability in these various aspects of your life. Part of achieving rootedness is maintaining one’s character, or “uniting one’s face and heart,” as rootedness is about performing life well, not just completing “right” actions (Section 4).
While Aristotle emphasizes that the good life is the happy life, this is a point of difference for the Nahuas; one should not anticipate happiness as the end result, but rather as a byproduct of pursuing a rooted life. Rootedness is based on the ideas that human life is slippery (people make mistakes), transitory (not only humans but all of nature), and not necessarily based in happiness. Based on these perspectives, the Nahuas believe “that one is seeking to lead a worthwhile life,” and living a meaningful life on earth is not necessarily conducive to happiness (Section 5). In order to be able to serve our community well and contribute meaningfully to our society, we must first be rooted, or stable in ourselves.
Parent’s Don’t Approve of Girlfriend
Tl;dr OP brings his British girlfriend over to his house to meet his parents for the first time. His parents are close-minded, racist, and xenophobic, so they dislike the girlfriend for being British. Immediately after having dinner, the parents rush the GF out of the house and berate the son for “going behind their back” and dating a “whore”. The parents don’t want her back in their house ever again, and want the son to break up with her but respect that it is his choice if he wants to or not.
The most prominent characteristic of the Nahuas is the idea of society being the focal point of life. They give the impression that individuals must be active members of society in order to even have the opportunity to have a “good” life. Additionally, from the Nahuas perspective,
“…if one looks at their analysis of good and bad performance of social roles, one sees that they justify assessment by appealing to a harm or help rendered.”
(Purcell 2017, 15)
As such, the first step to making a decision [regarding the protagonists’ dilemma] is to identify the society that you (the protagonist) would like to be a part of; after all, it is clear that (at least for the time being) the world with your significant other and the world with your parents are two opposing societies. Keep in mind that there is also a third society: that of your own.
Once this decision has been made, your goal should be to act in such a way that these societies see the “best” consequences. Given that the protagonists’ parents have always been racists, etc., it would appear unlikely that they will ever truly change their minds. In this sense, minus their dislike of the protagonist, there would not be much consequence in their regard. In contrast, any decision made will have drastic consequences for the protagonists’ significant other. Appeal to the parents, risk further mental harm in SO’s regard and parents retain their hatred (they might even feel empowered about their hatred). Appeal to SO, create an environment that fosters SO’s positive mental health and parents will remain unlikely to change their views.
If it was not already clear, the decision that is best for society as a whole is the one that fosters positive mental health in SO.
Not Parenting Sister’s Children
Tl;dr A college student who is also employed works from home. She used to babysit her sister’s kids in high school but ever since she graduated high school, her sister drops off her kids without any warning or compensation; assuming that she will just take care of her kids. The sisters’ mother is supposed to be taking care of the children but has not taken responsibility for them and is leaving all of the work to the college student daughter. She does not have the time to watch the kids and ends up making sure they are fed and watching TV or not making a mess, nothing more than that. She is not focusing as much in her classes as she should and could be because of the kids. She is wondering if she is the asshole for not taking responsibility for these kids that her sister drops off and does not take responsibility for.
The Nahuas had systems that guided moral integrity within the society based on the extent and the quality of communal cooperation. The individual remains the focus for moral decisions and behavior, but the ultimate motivating factor remains the overall good and rootedness of the community.
“Assessments of right action, then, follow from an understanding of what it means to lead a good human and communal life. I think it clear, then, that the Nahuas reasoned about the good and the right in the same sort of way as eudaemonists do.”
(Purcell 2017, 15)
Right and wrong is governed by its effect on the overall health of the group and therefore in survival modes, is easy to understand as individuals do the best of their ability to provide for themselves and family members. Today, these interactions become more complex as our community size has increased greatly. Yet, expectations for individual task completion remains and is crucial for successful daily interactions. In the case of the sister, because her family members were not successfully completing their responsibilities, she was failing to complete tasks assigned to her as well as the original job of watching her sister’s children.
In the Nahuas’ community, the mother’s actions as well as the older sister’s, would receive blame as both are unable to successfully provide proper care for the children while simultaneously overburdening a valuable member of the family with more responsibility than can be taken on. Even with multiple warnings, the mother and sister fail to make changes that ultimately degrades the states of everyone, including the children who aren’t getting the attention they require.
Conclusion
While reading the two moral prompts, the reader can clearly see that there are similarities between how the Nahuas would view these distinct scenarios. The main focal point of their views is that morality is based on being rooted in “one’s body, in one’s psych, in one’s community by social rites and role, and in teotl” (Purcell 2017, 13). They stress the importance of being rooted in your actions and doing whatever you do with excellence, as well as being a big part of your community and helping society.
In both examples, there are certain functions that the people must successfully do. In the first example, the function of the narrator is to be a good boyfriend and keep the girlfriend’s feelings in mind. This is being achieved as the guy has clearly made time for his girlfriend and is trying to make her feel better. The function of the parents is to support their son and his choices, however that is not the case as they want him and his girlfriend to break up due to their own racist ideology, therefore it can be stated that they are acting morally wrong.
Just like this example, the second moral prompt also looks at the functions. The mom’s responsibility is to take her care of her kids and the grandma’s responsibility is to take care of the grandkids whenever they can’t be taken care of by their mother. Both these functions are not being achieved as neither of them are taking care of the kids and are dumping this responsibility on the mom’s sister (grandma’s second daughter) who is in college. One can say that her responsibility is her education and helping out whenever she can. However, the mom and grandma are not doing their part of taking care of the kids and instead are overburdening the college student, which is not giving her the chance of successfully achieving her responsibility, thus the Nahuas would assume that they are acting morally wrong.
In comparing the two prompts, the reader can also see that the community in which the author of the Reddit post is a part of is toxic. The Nahuas emphasize being good to the community. The parents of the first example and the mom and grandma of the second example are not being good to the other people in their community, therefore are in the wrong. As much as the others are being treated badly, they continue to want to stay in the community by trying to reason with the parents (as in the first moral problem) and taking care of the children even when they can’t (as in the second moral problem).