Philosophers discussed the question: are the powerful
morals the same as the morals of powerful people? And is the power (or the
ability to do what the person wants) enough to measure a value as a good or
bad? Or that must be a look at the benefits meanwhile?
And since some people can avoid every possible
punishment for their bad doings (besides their perspective about living this
life and only); we get that the fears aren’t enough to keep the person
committed to noble morals. Because they can escape and succeed to get in what
they aspire whatever the environment truly is in.
If the fears that comes for the environment generally
(and from others in particular), and to easily avoid any possible punishment,
we’ll need another factor to keep the control, it’s the self-control. When the
person exceeds the level of worrying about what others may do in return, to
reach the level of worrying about the self-fulfillment; where the person
carries such inner reference for self-controlling.
That mechanism comes from the faith that’s locate into
the person himself due the convictions s/he has, to prevent him from doing
anything wrong even if he can avoid that social judgment. And instead of just
caring about their reactions towards him; he’ll care about his (re)-action
towards others. Because he has an unseen faith that everything he does; will
certainly be judged for, even if he can escape the social judgment. And that’s
the advantage which takes out the bad traits in the human and elevate from his
value in the existence. But may a faith bring such feelings although it’s not
doing that deep effect into the person.
Moreover we can still have some misunderstanding and
maybe an opposition too about the same matter, that's why the question will
be: beside the fears and the self-
controlling; what else we need to do too? What’s the more criteria we need for
reaching the point of being agreed on common values and morals? (to stabilizise
the people's life).
