The philosopher Henri Bergson proposed two types of morality, and with them, two types of ‘religion’. He identified ‘closed morality’, which goes with ‘static religion’, and ‘open morality’ which goes with ‘dynamic religion’. Closed morality – said Bergson – is about maintaining social cohesion, it has a set of codified rules and regulations which go to shore up social bonds. It is primarily concerned with the survival of a particular group, so it’s a kind of conflict or warfare morality, and it is enforced or reinforced by the sense that there are gods or a God which rule and care for that group of people. This closed morality, Bergson thought, is a kind of biological necessity, it is aimed at keeping us alive as a species.
On the other hand, Bergson suggests, there is such a thing as ‘open morality’ which is inclusive, universal, and aimed at bringing about peace. Its ‘religion’ is dynamic and creative, it is progressive and adaptable.
To develop on Bergson’s idea, perhaps we can surmise that where human beings are less concerned with the issues of species survival, the need for closed morality and it’s static religion diminishes, leading ultimately to its abandonment.
|
|
|
|