Game of Thrones beautifully portrays a diverse set of philosophical beliefs and human practices, many of which cannot all be simultaneously true, presenting the main tenets of postmodernism as the series unfolds. I have written about how the show captures the postmodern spirit rather well already [1] (oh yes, there are plenty of things I want to write about concerning Game of Thrones!). This time I want to focus on something related but distinct: why moral skepticism is the best conclusion regarding ethics that the characters of the show can reach. In the world of Westeros there are multiple primary religions--one generally acknowledged theological system called the Faith of the Seven and another system that worships the "Old Gods." In Essos there is the Dothraki religion that involves a deity called the Great Stallion (the Dothraki are a people whose culture revolves around horses), complete with its own eschatology and prophecies.
In all the episodes I have seen so far, the first 10 (all of season one), there is no evidence that has been present for the conclusion that one of these religions is true and the others false. A companion of Jon Snow named Sam complains in season one about how the Seven do not answer his prayers, leading to him converting to worship of the Old Gods while he lives in the Night's Watch. People make casual references to these religions, albeit often brief and vague ones, and yet they never describe any actual evidence for any of them, much less evidence that favors one over the others.
An inevitable philosophical consequence of this--although it has not yet been mentioned by any of the characters--is a total absence of any sound basis for a values system [2]. Although, of course, by logical necessity there would still have to be some sort of uncaused cause in the universe of Game of Thrones, it does not follow from the existence of an uncaused cause alone that morality exists, and none of the religions in Westeros have to be true by necessity, meaning that perhaps there is no such thing as right or wrong in the series world. There is no reason, in the context of the information given by the series (in the episodes I have viewed), for any characters to lean more towards the moral tenets of one ideology as opposed to another.
There are some spoilers for season one below.
Lord Stark adhered to a very objectivist, deontological moral philosophy before his beheading, one that recognizes that if a thing is wrong it is wrong in itself, not because of unwanted political consequences. He frequently spoke of honor, unwilling to violate his conceptions of it, being the only advisor to King Robert Baratheon to refuse to condone killing Daenerys' unborn child, and being ready to execute Ser Jorah for slave trafficking using criminals. Eddard Stark is firm in his moral convictions and chastises others for not having the same consistency, for not universally condemning and avoiding actions he considers evil. But there is no evidence that his moral system is any more legitimate than that of the others around him--or even that of the Dothraki, an Essos tribe which has no moral objections to war rape, abusive slavery, drawn-out tortures, militarism, and arbitrary murder of civilians. The Dothraki celebrate only coercive strength, and the likes of Cersei Lannister only want to acknowledge truths that grant a Machiavellian power of manipulation over others. Lord Stark's ethical beliefs certainly are not reflected in the actions of other inhabitants of Westeros or Essos.
In the series world, why is Stark's moral system correct and those of others incorrect? The only things these characters can appeal to are religions with no evidential support, subjective pangs of conscience, or arbitrary legal systems steeped in traditions. At the very least, Westeros shows what the world looks like when different consciences, legal systems, and cultural norms collide. If there is no moral nature to the uncaused cause and if none of the religions of Westeros or Essos are true, then moral nihilism is the only correct stance on ethics in Westeros; since no one in Westeros or Essos can verify or falsify any of the religions practiced therein, though, moral skepticism is the only legitimate position on morality for their inhabitants to hold. The absence of verifiable (here I mean evidentially supportable) divine revelation leaves the people only able to rely on fallacious appeals to emotion, tradition, and authority.
People don't often take moral epistemology seriously enough, even, unfortunately, Christians. I would encourage Christians who are willing to watch Game of Thrones and who think that conscience and social norms hold any legitimate authority in moral epistemology to view the series--and to see what diverse, conflicting moral beliefs exist when people act like social norms, legal systems, or conscience can reveal moral truths. Such beliefs about moral epistemology are fallacious, untrue, and inevitably lead to subjective and arbitrary judgments that conflict with those of others. The dangers of conscience and social conditioning are many.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2018/02/winter-is-coming-realism-of-westeros.html
[2]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-nature-of-conscience.html
No comments:
Post a Comment