Morals, Metaphysics and Naturalism
4. Moral Codes as Traffic Lights of Life
My analogy with traffic rules contains another gem. Instructively, traffic lights may be seen as a metaphor for moral codes. Traffic signals regulate our movement on the road. Moral codes serve as the traffic lights of life. Both moral codes and road rules prescribe which actions are prohibited, which are obligatory and which are permissible. A red light at an intersection signals that crossing the intersection is prohibited. A green light obligates the driver to continue driving through the intersection without unnecessary delay. An amber light permits the driver either to drive through the intersection or to stop before it. Facing an amber light, it is at the driver's discretion which they choose to do.
This same normative structure—prohibit, obligate, permit—is a key feature of our moral codes. Just as the nature of our obligation before a traffic light depends on the circumstance (am I facing a red, green or amber light?), how we ought to act according to a moral code depends on the circumstance at hand.
Let me give a couple of examples. Take the moral code concerning the taking of a life. When a traffic light flashes red, this situation prohibits the driver from entering the intersection. In like fashion, if the situation in life concerns an innocent bystander, the moral code regarding taking life prohibits killing the innocent person.
In the circumstance in which the driver faces a green light, they are obligated to proceed through the intersection. Similarly, in life, if the situation concerns an attacking enemy combatant during war time, the moral code regarding taking life obligates the killing of the enemy combatant.
Finally, if the driver faces an amber light, this circumstance permits the driver to enter the intersection at the driver's discretion. In like fashion, if the life situation concerns a violent intruder imposing deadly force, the moral code regarding taking life permits the killing of the intruder as a last resort. Whether the home owner kills the intruder or not is at their discretion.
As a second example, consider the moral code regarding the taking of another's property. Akin to facing a red light at an intersection, if the life situation concerns a law-abiding neighbour, the moral code regarding taking property prohibits stealing their car.
Related to a driver facing a green light, if the life situation concerns a would-be thief about to perform an armed robbery, the moral code regarding taking property obligates an able-bodied bystander taking the robber's firearm without their permission in order to prevent the robbery.
Finally, as with a driver faced with an amber light, if the life situation concerns a farmer giving away surplus oranges, the moral code regarding taking property permits a passer-by to pick up some of the oranges.
The key lesson I'm trying to illustrate here is the similarity between the obligations ensuing from facing a traffic light and our moral responsibilities incumbent upon particular life circumstances. In each case, the norm prescribes the action that is prohibited, that which is obligatory and that which is at the agent's discretion. In that sense, moral codes are the traffic lights of our lives.
An ancillary lesson here is how moral rules admit of exceptions in extraordinary circumstances. The rule 'Do not kill' and the rule 'Do not take another's property' are not absolute commands dictated by a god or made necessary by some spooky feature of the universe. A naturalist account of morality explains how we can and do reason about which exceptions to allow and which not. In weighing the circumstances in which it is permitted to kill, for example, we consider the likely impacts on well-being, the resulting undermining of essential institutions, and so on. A naturalist account makes sense of our moral deliberations over rules, just as it makes intelligible how we decide and refine the rules of the road.
