Do questions like Why should I be moral? or Why shouldnt I be selfish? have definitive answers as do some questions in other Areas of Knowledge? Does having a definitive answer make a question more or less important?

It is clear that there is no definitive truth when it comes to perception or emotion. An abstract painting may infuse depression on one observer while shine rays of warmth on to another. Perception is a significant influence when referring to moral issues, or more commonly known as ethics, ethics refers to how you view and understand the world. This concept of understanding and perception begins to assemble from the moment a person is born. From understanding the first baby steps in life to understanding Complex mathematics, it is a rulebook that a person attains through the experiences in life. Because it is impossible for two individuals to have the exact same experiences, it is impossible to have the same moral values.  

Some may argue that there is a definitive answer to the question “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” and that saying there is no definitive truth is merely an excuse or argument made by those who choose to be selfish. Some may argue that the answer to the question “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” is simply that you "Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you," (Analects 15:23) or that we must "Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself, and you will find that this is the shortest way to benevolence." (Mencius VII.A.4.) Some may state that selfishness is one’s greedy desires and that there is no justification for selfish actions including stealing.

I also believe that there is no justification for stealing or the act of being selfish. However what is the true definition of selfish? Unlike the question “what does one plus one equal?” it is not supported by a universal reason because it also involves emotion and perception, which are biased opinions of an individual. Perception changes from person to person, the differentiation is even greater from country to country.

Obvious differentiation can be seen for example when we compare war torn countries such as Iraq to countries that are at peace. The question of “why shouldn’t I be selfish?” Is much more difficult to answer in a war torn country because of the fact that food and shelter is not always available like it is in Canada; children who are considered unselfish or do no take what food is available in Canada will starve and die of hunger in Iraq. Therefore in a poverty-stricken country the definition of selfish greatly differs from the Canadian definition. This is why Canadians living in a country of peacekeepers may find it difficult to understand the actions of those who live in war torn countries. This is because of the different experiences that have influenced and have changed their perception and their emotions toward the world. Ethics or the questioning of moral values is an area of knowledge in which more than one answer can be correct as long as there is legitimate reasoning.

When it comes to Mathematics and Natural Sciences however, there is often a definitive answer to a question. One plus one will always equal two. The result of the mixing of an acid and a base will always be water, salt, and carbon dioxide. We agree and have a definitive answer because we all have a universal reason of belief. Therefore there cannot be disagreements in the principles of mathematics and natural sciences.

An argument that can be made against this statement would be that one deer plus one wolf would not always result in two animals. If the wolf was full, then chances are that one wolf plus one deer will result in to two. But if the wolf were starving, then the answer would change because the wolf might decide to eat the deer. Therefore the question one plus one can have many possible answers.

The argument brings up a good point, but we must realize that any area of knowledge that becomes influenced by another will result in obvious alterations. Human Sciences for example is a break-off from Natural Science. Both the sciences contain the same basic principles however answers may become harder to answer due to ethical and emotional beliefs because it involves humans. The same would be true for mathematics. Mathematics itself contains definitive truths, however when associated with animals, multiple definitive truths can appear. This again is because living things are not based on simple patterns rather they are complex and small changes can have significant impact on the result, thus leading to a question with many definitive truths.

Having a definitive answer for a question is no different to having many definitive answers. Questions that have definitive answers come from areas of knowledge such as Science, and Mathematics. Science and Mathematics once again are areas of knowledge that are unaffected by human emotion and perception. The answer contains no room for error because the variables are absolute and cannot be altered significantly. Questions that involve humans, on the other hand often can include more than one definitive answer because humans do not act in specific patterns or formulas; rather they are influenced by their own emotions and ways of perception. The recording of history for example is influenced greatly by the interpretation and the emotion of a historian. Historians for example are still debating the reasons behind the Holocaust today. Some believe that “the Holocaust was started in 1942 as a result of the failure of the Nazi deportation policy and the impending military losses in Russia.” (Hans Mommsen, 1995) While others percieve that “ordinary Germans were knowing and willing participants in the Holocaust, which he claims had its roots in a deep eliminationist German .” (Daniel Goldhagen, 1996) The questions regarding abortion and same-sex marriages are also human related topics that do not contain a definitive answer. Even our language is often misleading because often sentences may contain more than one meaning. There is very little difference between questions that have definitive truths and those that do not.  The difference is simply whether or not the question includes features such as emotion and perception. Questions that do have definitive answers and questions that do not are equally important because one reinforces the basic principles of the implementation of science; giving us an absolute truth or definition. While the other reminds us that issues including abortion, which is a question focusing on moral values will always exist in life. Without definitive answers there is no ground on which two people can argue. However without questions such as “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” that require personal reflection, we would not have anything to argue about.

The question “Why should I be moral?” or “Why shouldn’t I be selfish?” is a question based primarily on human emotion and perception. There is no correct emotion or proper perception therefore we cannot find one absolute truth. Not having a definite answer however does not make the question any more important than a question that does because the only difference between the two questions is whether or not the answer focuses on the opinions of humans, or the legitimate principles of science.