Secular Morality and the "Noble"

A series of posts have recently run in the Stand To Reason post that argued the merits of an evolutionary origin of moral principles that could be explained over against a divine absolute standard.  Such an approach would reject the ideals of a Mosaic ordinance or sharia tradition based on a pragmatic foundation of moral transitioning from core concepts to refined details that bend and adjust to changing cultural norms.  As interesting as this line of debate had been, I have found one fundamental flaw that dooms the tenets of evolutionary morality.

It cannot, and will never, embrace the noble act, the self-sacrificial, the unselfish, the motives of helping the other to the detriment or endangerment of self.  If evolution is the driving force, the important issues of self-survival, self-preservation, and self-advancement would overrule the "noble."

I think of the medieval tale of Sir Gwain and the Green Knight.  The knights of the Round Table are petitioned by a lady-in-waiting whose mistress is held captive by the Green Knight.  She would ask for a prestigious knight as Lancelot, but he is indisposed.  Gwain, a young and lesser known knight, volunteers to save the lady.  The lady-in-waiting scorns the uppity young lad, but agrees to lead him to the Green Knight's castle.  After a few side adventures which proves Gwain's merits, they finally arrive at the treacherous knight's castle.

The moment of that arrival was at 11 A.M.  Gwain prepares to blow the castle horn to announce his presence when the lady-in-waiting asks Gwain to delay that summons.  The Green Knight is under a charm where his greatest strength would be at the sun's height, at noon.  If Gwain waits till three or four in the afternoon, the battle would be in his favor.  Gwain scorns the woman's advice, stating that as a knight of integrity, it would not do for him to seek such advantage, but battle the Green Knight at his greatest strength.  Gwain blows the horn, requests battle from the Green Knight, and engages in battle for the liberty of the captive damsel.

And, after horrific battle of hours duration, Gwain triumphs, spares the Green Knight whose loyalty is to be pledged to King Arthur, wins the release of the woman, and accomplishes the goal of his mission: to prove the merits of a noble knight pledged in the pursuit of justice.

Gwain would never do in an evolutionary scheme of ethics.  Mankind would never aspire to higher, better goals in a evolutionary ethics.  A system that reckons man for ape can never have such lofty aspirations, all claims notwithstanding.

Which is why godliness trumps mere morality, which is becoming rather chimerical these days.  Which is why no society will have a future in adopting it.  Chesterton is correct:  It is not that Christianity was tried and found wanting, but found difficult, and never tried.

We must stop trying to be moral;  we needs must be noble.  That is why "paying it forward" is a paper tiger, awesome only in form, but lacking true bite in its teeth.  As much good as can be accomplished with a PIF mentality, far preferable of "spend it recklessly."  Much more good is done if we feel we must not wait for some awesome kindness granted to us.