The conscience of Thai society....

[benalibina]

Conscience is an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment that assists in distinguishing right from wrong. Moral judgment may derive from values or norms (principles and rules).

What is what specifies the " conscience of a thai, or thai society as a whole ?

[geronimo]

Too early in the morning for such depth!

[Gecko123]

word salad

[daveAustin]

Somtam.

[KMartinHandyman]

Me first

[KarenBravo]

Thai conscience?

Whatever it is, I gave up on it in 1991.

That was the year Lauda Air flight 004 crashed in Thailand and the rescue teams and local villagers looted the crash site.

[Blackheart]

Difficult to say as it could be said each thai is individually different.

Or it could be said that the majority are similar.

[Berkshire]

Hmmm, ok this could be interesting. Most Thai's that I come across try to do the right thing most of the time.

However, if you're going to discuss an entire society, you may want to define what is right or wrong. We can dispense with the obvious, that murder, theft, rape, assault, etc., is always wrong in all societies. But at least in my home country (USA), the following is not so clear:

Is abortion right or wrong...i.e., should it be legal?

Should gays be allowed to marry, adopt children?

Is Christianity more "right" than, say, Islam?

Should freedom of speech be allowed in ALL cases?

Should more be done to combat global warming?

Should everyone have a right to own a gun?

Should marijuana be legal?

Should the minimum wage be raised?

Etc. So if even Americans can't agree among ourselves what is right or wrong, how can anyone here tell the Thais what is right or wrong?

[Dexlowe]

Thai conscience?

Whatever it is, I gave up on it in 1991.

That was the year Lauda Air flight 004 crashed in Thailand and the rescue teams and local villagers looted the crash site.

I witnessed this - and I agree that it was a defining moment for me as well.

OP, the key to your answer, I think, lies in the word "society". Societies are made up of communities that protect and defend each other - in a broad terms, I mean, Have a look at the communities around you and you will see very few who "protect and defend" each other, each individual, each defined area. Without cohesive communities to form a society with generally agreed values, morals and ethics, you don't have a collective conscience, in my opinion. That is how I see Thailand.

[Berkshire]

Thai conscience?

Whatever it is, I gave up on it in 1991.

That was the year Lauda Air flight 004 crashed in Thailand and the rescue teams and local villagers looted the crash site.

I witnessed this - and I agree that it was a defining moment for me as well.

OP, the key to your answer, I think, lies in the word "society". Societies are made up of communities that protect and defend each other - in a broad terms, I mean, Have a look at the communities around you and you will see very few who "protect and defend" each other, each individual, each defined area. Without cohesive communities to form a society with generally agreed values, morals and ethics, you don't have a collective conscience, in my opinion. That is how I see Thailand.

Thais are very good at defending their family and friends. That's sort of a microcosm of this "community" thing that you speak of. It's sort of like what Sonny Corleone (Godfather II) said..."Your country ain't your blood."

[KarenBravo]

......and that's the trouble. Every despicable act can be justified, understood and forgiven if it was done "for family".

[optad]

......and that's the trouble. Every despicable act can be justified, understood and forgiven if it was done "for family".

The moral relativism you refer too is a disturbing twenty-first century trend. It is convenient, produces a generation without scruples and destroys the positive boundaries, the 'morality' place that surrounds people to delimit human excesses. Generation 'Y's are defined by this in a large part. ["because i can" mantra].

Perceived morality lessened is simply replaced with blunt plain choices as action still happen upon events. The absence of a value or principle to guide or govern those choices is the absence of the moral code or positive boundaries in default circumstances. Quite simply these values are not acquired or inherited but are taught and if they do not exist in sufficient levels look to the preceding generation. It is a decline and not a neglect.

In more specific terms, i think what really is being discussed is the rise of the 'me generation' and their ability to justify 'self' over the common weal, or greater communal responsibilities. This is a global trend and you will see its worst in areas of greatest economic distress.

In pragmatic terms re Thailand, and speculating a little, I lament a greater emphasis on the stricter Buddhist ethos and their tenets not being truly conveyed or taught. Buddhism seems to permit lassitude when poorly applied and understood in very shallow ways. And it is very loosely applied in Thailand. It is often a convenient justification for very selfish events and acts. It tends to conjure an allowance for acts to exist soley between 'the self' and Buddha without always respecting consequence or the other. This ability to rationalise actions does not have the positive boundaries i referred to above. It can be licentious and we often witness those results here.

Ultimately the OP's question is fraught, always going to be but if things were to improve societally, I would look to encourage young people to learn experientially, by doing, more small things that have honest and practical ramifications communally. That is fitting in locus, respects culture and gives impetus to the whole from the individual. But who hasn't got an idea re this...eh?

[sipi]

Up to you.

[bangkokjulia]

I would have thought mai pben rai.

[Briggsy]

In contrast to the OP's definition of conscience, I would class it as a luxury afforded to those who live in circumstances where they are afforded protection. Survival comes before conscience.

[laolover88]

"Conscience is an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment that assists in distinguishing right from wrong. Moral judgment may derive from values or norms (principles and rules)".

I am not a philosopher nor Thai

Well that is the Wikipedia "definition"; which I have to say I don't think is right. The definition implies that conscience is somehow a 'skill' that be acquired. An "intuitive" aspect of being human/existing "Dasein" would have been denied by many thinkers. Locke believed that their were two things subject to reason and demonstration. One was mathematics, the other was epistemology ie knowledge which is critical to moral behavior. The development and deployment of of conscience relies heavily on knowledge and self knowledge. The simplistic example is the person who says "I didn't know it was wrong".

Conscience is not a "thing" or "object". It is constructed individually and communally in a historical context. Foucault acknowledged that conscience derives from a set of power relations and repetitions. And he was only too aware of the power of conscience"

He said: "Freedom of conscience entails more dangers than authority and despotism" Power relations some part played by authority.

So you come to the Thai concept.

The Thai word is มโนธรรม

Which very approximately translates as

Control the mind of a person. A system of thought and feeling. This allows the individual to decide what is right and wrong, what actions should and should not do.

This of course leaves out any specified "authority" except the individual.

Have never really thought about this! And the historical role of the family in determining "conscience" is something I don't presently understand.

Sorry! A bit "heavy" Very interesting question! Shall have to interrogate Mrs.

[richard_smith237]

Many people have wrote it in the past on this forum, my experience here concurs..

Money - it solves problems beyond all else, it is desired more than anything else, it is respect greater than anything else...

So.. whatever the Thai Conscience is, it is in the aggregate something which can be bought....

[optad]

"Conscience is an aptitude, faculty, intuition or judgment that assists in distinguishing right from wrong. Moral judgment may derive from values or norms (principles and rules)".

I am not a philosopher nor Thai

Well that is the Wikipedia "definition"; which I have to say I don't think is right. The definition implies that conscience is somehow a 'skill' that be acquired. An "intuitive" aspect of being human/existing "Dasein" would have been denied by many thinkers. Locke believed that their were two things subject to reason and demonstration. One was mathematics, the other was epistemology ie knowledge which is critical to moral behavior. The development and deployment of of conscience relies heavily on knowledge and self knowledge. The simplistic example is the person who says "I didn't know it was wrong".

Conscience is not a "thing" or "object". It is constructed individually and communally in a historical context. Foucault acknowledged that conscience derives from a set of power relations and repetitions. And he was only too aware of the power of conscience"

He said: "Freedom of conscience entails more dangers than authority and despotism" Power relations some part played by authority.

So you come to the Thai concept.

The Thai word is มโนธรรม

Which very approximately translates as

Control the mind of a person. A system of thought and feeling. This allows the individual to decide what is right and wrong, what actions should and should not do.

This of course leaves out any specified "authority" except the individual.

Have never really thought about this! And the historical role of the family in determining "conscience" is something I don't presently understand.

Sorry! A bit "heavy" Very interesting question! Shall have to interrogate Mrs.

^

Moral judgements inform the consciousness, and to be clear re skills or aptitudes, they are an aside to what is innate or a reflexive instinct in a moral education; ie morals are not dwelt upon but axiomatically reacted to. Morals therefore inform us consciously what we should or should not do, cognitively.

Laolover88, it was a good effort to structurally link Locke to Foucault but really these superstructural approaches will fail here for their inability to align inductive and deductive aspects of what it is to be or learnt in a moral function or outcome.

Supposition: A person who give money to charity is a good man. Therefore all people who give are good/ is the deductive inference but we know that this is often not the case. Yet we want clear and simple deductive rules to understand these complex social events. Morality to appeals to this general truth, distilled to the specific. A courteous person always says 'thank you' and would be known for his pleasant and moral ways. Point here is that the logic holds true but the original statement is false. Good manners do not necessarily mean a moral person.

So the arbitars or what is and is not moral is needed in a philosophical sense to resolve the above but we will leave that for another time place or forum!!

Interesting re the inductive reasoning above, is the specific to the general. A kind of leading by example approach to establish the moral/general. So from what small things we see we can make larger statement. Supposition: 'A person who i have seen holding open a door for the next is a mannered person. All people who i have seen who do this are mannered people therefore it is good manners to hold open the door for the next. ' And thus becomes moral.

The not do what you are told but see, think, do, and role model actions to create morality.

Point being and link to quote posted above, super-structurated ideas will always be deductive in a reasoned cognitive psychology, and almost certainly break down over generations as they are not self sustaining.

Moral positions informed inductively or better advised from parents, teachers etc /or exemplified and when proven true [validated to self] will be repeated and self generate and multiply and become moral generally.

...

..

.

Unless, of course you were born presbyterian.

[benalibina]

In contrast to the OP's definition of conscience, I would class it as a luxury afforded to those who live in circumstances where they are afforded protection. Survival comes before conscience.

At 1st I concurred with your comment. However Schindler, a.o., during WWII, proved your comment to be incorrect.

[benalibina]

Many people have wrote it in the past on this forum, my experience here concurs..

Money - it solves problems beyond all else, it is desired more than anything else, it is respect greater than anything else...

So.. whatever the Thai Conscience is, it is in the aggregate something which can be bought....

Not solely my experiences. However to sustainability of "proper" conscience might be more difficult for people in general and, maybe, Thais in specific.

[starky]

I would have thought mai pben rai.

I would also add alai godai, sabaii sabii

[starky]

......and that's the trouble. Every despicable act can be justified, understood and forgiven if it was done "for family".

The moral relativism you refer too is a disturbing twenty-first century trend. It is convenient, produces a generation without scruples and destroys the positive boundaries, the 'morality' place that surrounds people to delimit human excesses. Generation 'Y's are defined by this in a large part. ["because i can" mantra].

Perceived morality lessened is simply replaced with blunt plain choices as action still happen upon events. The absence of a value or principle to guide or govern those choices is the absence of the moral code or positive boundaries in default circumstances. Quite simply these values are not acquired or inherited but are taught and if they do not exist in sufficient levels look to the preceding generation. It is a decline and not a neglect.

In more specific terms, i think what really is being discussed is the rise of the 'me generation' and their ability to justify 'self' over the common weal, or greater communal responsibilities. This is a global trend and you will see its worst in areas of greatest economic distress.

In pragmatic terms re Thailand, and speculating a little, I lament a greater emphasis on the stricter Buddhist ethos and their tenets not being truly conveyed or taught. Buddhism seems to permit lassitude when poorly applied and understood in very shallow ways. And it is very loosely applied in Thailand. It is often a convenient justification for very selfish events and acts. It tends to conjure an allowance for acts to exist soley between 'the self' and Buddha without always respecting consequence or the other. This ability to rationalise actions does not have the positive boundaries i referred to above. It can be licentious and we often witness those results here.

Ultimately the OP's question is fraught, always going to be but if things were to improve societally, I would look to encourage young people to learn experientially, by doing, more small things that have honest and practical ramifications communally. That is fitting in locus, respects culture and gives impetus to the whole from the individual. But who hasn't got an idea re this...eh?

Agree with your assesment of the "me" generation but not at all with your Buddhism comments. A lot of peolple like to bandy around the Thais inability to follow the tenents of Buddhism whenever they do something wrong. Despite the fact that buddhism is an ideology with the basic principles being something to aspire to rather than a strict code, I would argue there are very few Buddhists in the real sense in Thailand at all. It has always been my understanding that the Thai belief system is a hodge podge of Buddhism, Brahmanism and animism. Further to that like all belief systems/religions people will always chose the path of least resistance apply the things they like and discard the rest. Simple human nature. Thais whether they be Buddhist or otherwise are no more or less infalliable than the rest of us. Particulary it seems the younger generation.

[sipi]

My Mrs once told me "Life is like a gold necklace. It is precious but you can lose it at any time".

Maybe "disassociation" is a Thai concept.

[Briggsy]

In contrast to the OP's definition of conscience, I would class it as a luxury afforded to those who live in circumstances where they are afforded protection. Survival comes before conscience.

At 1st I concurred with your comment. However Schindler, a.o., during WWII, proved your comment to be incorrect.

Arguably Schindler's acts and all other moral, altruistic acts actually support my comment. By growing up in a safe and protected environment with moral guidance and boundaries, Schindler was able to develop a conscience. Had Schindler et al grown up in a world where the way to get ahead was through violence, killing, stealing, cheating and the strong dominating the weak in every way possible, they would not have acted in such a conscientious manner later in life.

[Berkshire]

In contrast to the OP's definition of conscience, I would class it as a luxury afforded to those who live in circumstances where they are afforded protection. Survival comes before conscience.

At 1st I concurred with your comment. However Schindler, a.o., during WWII, proved your comment to be incorrect.

The only reason why we even know of Schindler was because his actions were highly unusual and uncommon, i.e., bravery and selflessness beyond the call. If everyone was like Schindler, we would have never heard of him.

[1FinickyOne]

just seem to be different rules...

I left a chair under a pavilion in the rice fields where I like to go sit for peace and quiet. Nothing but fields around. You would have to walk into the property about 20 meters to get to the chair - - and someone did,, and stole the chair...

The second time I left a chair there, by accident, one of my family members lightly tied a rope around it - that seemed to secure ownership and it was not stolen though it would have been easily done...

I guess the rope showed ownership whereas the first appeared abandoned.

[Inyourendo]

They understand the science of a good con ...

Edited May 20, 2016 by Inyourendo

[marko kok prong]

Thai peppen no haab.

[benalibina]

Thanks to the people who have taken the effort to comment. I would have expected more though from many longterm residents/experts on this forum. Hopefully they are not struggling with their own conscience. Ah well.....