Page 162 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 3-4: Convention on the Rights of the Child: Educational Opportunities and Social Justice, eds. Zdenko Kodelja and Urška Štremfel
P. 162
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 3–4
“You see, first of all I would say that in order for a democracy to
work, in order for a society to work... Hegel saw this problem very, very
well... It needs something that Hegel called, and that is a little difficult to
translate into other languages - morality, let's say morality. Not moralism
or ethics, but morality. Morals and morality. And what does that mean?
It means that any business that otherwise relies on laws that are written
laws and as such are directly applicable, is applicable, and there is a letter
of the law that can be invoked, or no business will ever stand together...
What is needed in society is a set of customs and practices based on un-
written laws. For certain common, commonly accepted moral goods that
cannot be legislated, they cannot be enforced by law. In other words, there
must be some kind of consensus that is very difficult to achieve precise-
ly because it cannot be legislated. A certain definite consensus on what is
permissible and what is not permissible, what is appropriate and what is
not appropriate.
What is morality? Let's say: Someone gives you gifts, does you a fa-
vour, and you say thank you. What does thank you mean? There is no law
that says you have to say thank you. It means a minimal acknowledgement
of what the other person did to you, what they were not forced to do - and
you say thank you. What would happen if you stopped saying thank you?
I mean, in a sense... we would not be breaking any law, nothing would
happen apparently, but in a sense society would fall apart. That we have
certain moral criteria, criteria of morality - how we behave towards each
other, what is appropriate and what is not. Criteria that cannot be - that
is the point - cannot be clearly defined. You cannot write them down and
say: this is it.
And it seems to me that the problem of today's Slovene society is
largely the problem of Hegelian morality. This means that certain types of
statements, certain types of thinking, certain actions, which should sim-
ply be considered obscene, are actually allowed in the political sphere. Not
that they should be prohibited by law, because here - let us say the problem
of hate speech - it is always difficult to calibrate the right to freedom of ex-
pression and hate speech on the other side.
In a way, it is always incomprehensible to me - and this is a ques-
tion of morality - a question of common consensus, customs and practic-
es. What is permissible, what is appropriate and what is not? And I have
the impression that, especially in the last ten years, the standards of pub-
lic discourse in Slovenia have fallen very sharply. That it is suddenly per-
missible to say and do things that could not have been done publicly even
in the beginning after independence and also in socialist times. And that
the consensus criteria for what is decent and obscene are beginning to fall,
160
“You see, first of all I would say that in order for a democracy to
work, in order for a society to work... Hegel saw this problem very, very
well... It needs something that Hegel called, and that is a little difficult to
translate into other languages - morality, let's say morality. Not moralism
or ethics, but morality. Morals and morality. And what does that mean?
It means that any business that otherwise relies on laws that are written
laws and as such are directly applicable, is applicable, and there is a letter
of the law that can be invoked, or no business will ever stand together...
What is needed in society is a set of customs and practices based on un-
written laws. For certain common, commonly accepted moral goods that
cannot be legislated, they cannot be enforced by law. In other words, there
must be some kind of consensus that is very difficult to achieve precise-
ly because it cannot be legislated. A certain definite consensus on what is
permissible and what is not permissible, what is appropriate and what is
not appropriate.
What is morality? Let's say: Someone gives you gifts, does you a fa-
vour, and you say thank you. What does thank you mean? There is no law
that says you have to say thank you. It means a minimal acknowledgement
of what the other person did to you, what they were not forced to do - and
you say thank you. What would happen if you stopped saying thank you?
I mean, in a sense... we would not be breaking any law, nothing would
happen apparently, but in a sense society would fall apart. That we have
certain moral criteria, criteria of morality - how we behave towards each
other, what is appropriate and what is not. Criteria that cannot be - that
is the point - cannot be clearly defined. You cannot write them down and
say: this is it.
And it seems to me that the problem of today's Slovene society is
largely the problem of Hegelian morality. This means that certain types of
statements, certain types of thinking, certain actions, which should sim-
ply be considered obscene, are actually allowed in the political sphere. Not
that they should be prohibited by law, because here - let us say the problem
of hate speech - it is always difficult to calibrate the right to freedom of ex-
pression and hate speech on the other side.
In a way, it is always incomprehensible to me - and this is a ques-
tion of morality - a question of common consensus, customs and practic-
es. What is permissible, what is appropriate and what is not? And I have
the impression that, especially in the last ten years, the standards of pub-
lic discourse in Slovenia have fallen very sharply. That it is suddenly per-
missible to say and do things that could not have been done publicly even
in the beginning after independence and also in socialist times. And that
the consensus criteria for what is decent and obscene are beginning to fall,
160
