"... a post-moral society cannot by definition tell the difference between good and evil..."

In one of the most cogent and analytical responses to the Orlando terrorist attack, Stephen Turley provides insights to what, if not corrected, will be the deathknell of western culture:

Why does our society find it so difficult to blame radical jihadists for the murders they commit?

I think the key to understanding this incoherence can be found in what scholars call a “risk society,” which refers to the unique ways in which modern people deal with hazards and insecurities as they relate to the future. There are two reasons for why we moderns are unique in the way we handle potential threats and hazards:

First, we are more reliant on scientific and technological processes in our day-to-day living than any previous society. Science and technology have penetrated into virtually every aspect of our lives, from the moment we wake up to a digital alarm and turn on our lights, to making our cup of coffee and microwaving our breakfasts, to driving to work to sitting at a computer sending out emails and texts on our smart phones.

However, secondly, this technological age comes at a cost: technology-based societies tend to reject traditional moral conceptions of life. This is because technology is organized and governed by modern scientific processes which are considered value neutral and thus devoid of moral frames of reference. So, in many respects, we are living in what we might call a “post-traditional” or “post-moral age.” Indeed, this is why we have LGBT values, which are not found in traditional moral societies, in the first place.

And so, these scientific and technological processes have opened up to us a whole new future of unprecedented possibilities and potentialities, but without the aid of traditional morality to guide us into this brave new world.

So now that we are in this post-moral, post-traditional society, the question is: Whom do we blame when massacres like Orlando occur? Post-moral societies basically have two options: They can blame material and environmental factors or they can blame the previous moral tradition that once dominated society but is now reinterpreted as inherently oppressive.

There's more... and I think it's not only on point but prophetic.

A culture dismissive of transcendent mores and values is a culture in steep decay, a culture destined to come to an end.

Think on it.

Carry on.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Related articles

"We live in a society inebriated by technology"

"Should we destroy their livelihoods?"

"It affirms the great good of bringing the two halves of humanity together"

Comments

[Lands’nGrooves]

"But this won’t stop our secularized elite from celebrating equality and diversity on the one hand while increasing Muslim immigration, which has doubled since 1992, on the other.[3] In so doing, they will continue to create, however inadvertently, their own highly toxic climate, which threatens a clash of civilizations on our own soil."

Does this mean, Rick, you've rethought your position on Muslim immigration?

BTW, that statement is just another way to say "I think we should hold off of allowing Muslims to come to this country. At least until we get a handle on it" which was said by Donald Trump.

tim aka The Godless Heathen

[Rick]

My thoughts on Muslim immigration are pretty simple tim... we do what we need to do to clamp down on allowing radicals into the country... but we can't simply stay true to the ideals that made this country great and decide that all Muslims should be prevented from immigrating, because if we allow and support that, then there's nothing to prevent wholesale prevention of any religion, to include Christians, from immigrating depending solely on who's in power and how they wield that power.

It would be interesting however to hear what Turley has to say about a total shutdown of Muslim immigrants directly or of the Trump candidacy in particular.

Hoping to find the time to go check that out.

[Lands’nGrooves]

“…we do what we need to do to clamp down on allowing radicals into the country…”

And the problem being, what is a radical and what isn’t. Muslims have a vastly different idea what that means than you and I.

Many Muslims, including “non-radicals” who live in the west, believe in polygamy, female subjugation including but not limited to - genitalia mutilation, wearing of burkas, arranged marriages (often to first cousins), honor killings, and limited education.

Muslims also believe that Islam encapsulates all aspects of society, its laws and politics. That there is no separation between Islam and any aspects of daily life. Hence their Sharia Law, which many Muslims would like to have here, and Europe, even though they completely understand that it is not compatible with our Constitution.

Also, most dangerously, and where many Christians/Jews, etc. are completely ignorant, Muslims believe that Islam is the only true religion and those who are not Muslims are Infidels. (Think about that for a while). Muslims believe that Islam is dominate over any and all other religions, and its believers, and that Islam cannot be questioned, ever, and apostates must die. (What other religion believes such things?)

One only has to look at the Middle East, or any other predominantly Muslim country, to see the vast differences between their way of life and ours. They are not “misunderstood” or merely have some minor dissimilar societal mores than our traditional Western values. Islam is completely incompatible with our country. That’s not me being hyperbolic, that’s what THEY believe.

As your linked post concluded – “In so doing, they will continue to create, however inadvertently, their own highly toxic climate, which threatens a clash of civilizations on our own soil.”

Now tell me again why we should let them come here.

(BTW, Rick, I’m not some Right Wing lunatic bigot who hates on everyone who is different than me. I once was of the mindset like many Americans have - that Islam is “just another religion”, that it’s just a “few” radicals who believe in terrorism, etc. I’ve come to know and understand what Islam truly is through years of reading and educating myself. Islam is nothing but a death cult. Maybe not all Muslims are dangerous, but all follow a dangerous belief system

http://www.christianpost.com/news/ex-muslim-proposal-that-islam-is-tolerant-is-fallacious-dangerous-47349/

tim, aka The Godless Heathen

[Rick]

Tim, while we might agree on that which we believe to be the faults of the Islamic faith (and radical Islamic faith is more ideology than faith in my view), I find it problematic to state that because of those flaws, we must directly exclude those of the Muslim faith from entering this country or becoming citizens.

Again, if we reach a point in this country where we exclude people solely on the criteria of what it is they believe, then we have to understand that one day, someone can exclude us for the very same reason.

Is that the direction we want to go?

I think not.

We cannot have a religious litmus test as to who is or is not allowed into the country.

[Lands’nGrooves]

We don’t need a pure religious litmus test, we can base it upon a reasonable criteria of assimilation, which any of us with an ounce of common sense would agree is reasonable, we merely deny entry to those that originate from countries that exclude “us” from enjoying first class status in their home countries. Unless they themselves are religious minorities such as Middle East Christians who are being persecuted – the very definition of “refugee”.

Also, we should exclude folks who wish “us” death based upon whatever reasoning for that belief, not excluding religion.

There, done. If Muslims are denied entry because of those two examples, so be it. But we’ll all feel better about ourselves knowing we didn’t discriminate because solely because of religious intolerance.

But I’m still left to ask, as you allude to, what predominately Muslim country would welcome me, or you, if the tables were flipped? And more importantly, why is that? And also I’m supposed to just ignore that reality for moral superiority sake?

Then let us prepare for more San Bernardino’s and Boston bombings and etc., etc. We’ll be able to tell the victim’s families - “Sorry, but that we had to let them in.” Not to forget the rapes, robberies and other crimes that follows Muslim immigration like the plague.

tim, aka The Godless Heathen

[Rick]

... we merely deny entry to those that originate from countries that exclude “us” from enjoying first class status in their home countries.

To do this, we must ignore the plight of the legitimate attempting to flee that kind of tyranny.

let us prepare for more San Bernardino’s and Boston bombings and etc., etc. We’ll be able to tell the victim’s families - “Sorry, but that we had to let them in.” Not to forget the rapes, robberies and other crimes that follows Muslim immigration like the plague.

We have American citizens committing rapes, robberies and other crimes... who are here legitimately... and we have Muslims who live amongst us who are decent, law-abiding citizens.

I can't embrace this kind of all or nothing logic. I just can't.