DIALOGUE AND GLOBAL ETHICS

DIALOGUE AND GLOBAL ETHICS

Cornelius Afebu Omonokhua

If God wanted a world with one language, one religion and one culture, it would have been possible for him to do. Yet God loves unity in diversity hence the beauty in variety that we sometimes experience. Just think about this: Supposing a person wants to engage you in dialogue about the good that leads to happiness and avoidance of evil that leads to misery but this person does not believe in your sacred book or scriptures, what will you do? This person wants to sincerely find out if there is any form of morality or ethical principle that could make a person more human without reference to religious laws and commandments. I was thinking about this when at exactly 8.02am; on May 23, 2012 I received this message from Globacom network number 4040: All the differences in this world are of degree and not of kind, because oneness is the secret of everything.

Could there have been laws in world history that were natural and common to humanity before the advent of Christianity and Islam? Were the commandments recorded in the scriptures of the different religions dictated by God directly from heaven? What was the medium of communication? What could have been the role of the human instrument in the compilation and interpretation of the divine revelation since the word of God is communicated in human language? What type of ethics guided the world before the revealed religions? Could these laws be seen purely as pagan laws that should be discarded? Can we think of a global ethics that could direct humanity to a common good and that is acceptable to people of all religions and school of thought? Should it not be the case that since God is eternal, he has always guided human ethics from the beginning of creation? Does this not indicate or point to the fact that on the last day, God will be more concerned with our love and obedience to him through the ways we value and respect human dignity? Is it not true that religious fanaticism whereby some people are treated as second class citizens if they do not practise a particular religion in some part of the world is detested by God?

Perhaps these questions may be imperative in the Nigeria context given that some Christians have accused the Muslims of attempting to impose the Islamic laws on the nation while some Muslims see the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as Western and Christian? Is everything European really Christian? Has the time not really come to grow above these prejudices, biases and preconceptions? It is not an act of a great mind to reject a value simply because it has a particular religious label. Rather we can open our minds to sincerely enquire if the religious ethical principles have anything in common that can serve as a global ethics that may be used as a basis to formulate laws that may govern a secular state. I am not advocating here that there is no need for religious laws. The point I am trying to make is that laws that are peculiar to a particular religion should not be a subject of national and public debate.  

In my view, what is common to humanity is a search for what is true, what is good and what is useful. The golden rule existed before Christianity and Islam. Five hundred years before Christ, Confucius had said: Do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you. Emmanuel Kant stated long time ago: Act in such a way that you use the humanity, both in your person and in the person of any other, always as an end, and never merely as a means. Hippocrates and Dr. Thomas Sydenham who formulated the Golden rule in the 17^th century for medical practice said: No one has been treated by me otherwise that I would want to be treated if I had this illness.

This golden rule can be used to interpret both the secular and religious ethics. The world needs an ethical guide to happiness. It seems that of all that God has created everything in nature except human beings obey the natural order put in place by God. This must have been the reason for punishments. But some people have argued that punishment should be only for the purpose of correction and redirecting human life to the ultimate happiness. From the natural laws, it is perhaps possible to derive a global ethics that is acceptable to humanity irrespective of religion since there is only One God. Naturally human beings should know that life is sacred and that good ought to be done and that evil must be avoided. But how comes dialogue in this exposition? In the context of global ethics: the different religions can dialogue on these basic issues:

•  What do we have in common as human beings?
•  What are the things in our different religious ethics that unite us?
•  Are there practises in my religion that contradict human nature?
• To what extent does my religion promote peace and reconciliation?

It is my subjective opinion that what many people detest in some religious ethical norms is not the rules themselves but the punishment attached to them which they consider anachronistic. There is therefore need for form, textual and contextual re-evaluation of revelation since life is dynamic. The life of our ancestors two thousand years ago is different from the life of today. This can be substantiated with the various debates on capital punishment and various forms of physical punishments. Some people argue that it is the best way of relieving the society of criminals, while others argue that it serves as a deterrent to potential criminals.

Grace builds on nature and does not destroy it hence I can conveniently dialogue with a person who does not believe in my scripture. The way I talk and the way I act will convince my partner in dialogue that my religion is a total and complete way of life. Global ethics is consequently spiritualized in our attitude towards life and respect for humanity. It will be a contradiction and ridicule of my religious ethics if my actions contradict human dignity and value. Let us seek a global redefinition of freedom and human rights that are driving the world crazy today. Morality is one even in the context of relativism. Cultural and religious differences are diverse ways of expressing this common value that leads to happiness.  Common sense is the instrument of global ethics. It helps people of great minds to rule the world with ideas rather than religious and tribal sentiments.