Morality: Democracy Desguised?

Morality, what does it actually mean. Since our early education, we are led to believe that morality is the sense of being right, doing right and all the good things. But the question which is more basic than that is how do we define what is right and what is not? Is it on a subjective basis, does the view differ from person to person, from place to place, if yes, does every person have a different definition of morality and can these definitions clash? Could an act which is perfectly sound on the terms of morality by one human being be completely immoral by someone else's standards?

These were just some of the questions that were pondering in my mind yesterday and which resulted in a huge chain of thoughts. I decided to put them all down here.

Morality as I believe is not the sense of being right, it is what is majority of society believes to be right. The definitions of morality are bound to change as the society metamorphoses into a newer one and forms newer definitions and beliefs about what is right and what is not.

The first example that comes to my mind is Raja RamMohan Rai from India, the visionary who was instrumental in getting the 'Sati Pratha' banned from the Indian society. Now, just for the reference, 'Sati Pratha' was very much in practice in Indian society in the past and it is an act where the wife sits on the pyre of her husband and lays out her life. This act was very much moral in the Indian society which practiced it, it was not humane or justified in any manner by today's standards, but it was very moral according to that society. So, does this mean that Raja RamMohan Rai by getting this act banned performed a very immoral act? Well, in fact he did. He did the humane thing, but not moral by that society's standards. It is a different discussion that his future society saw and appreciated his visions. The society which introduced this pratha in the first place was also doing the moral thing by its beliefs.

So again, does this mean that morality is just 'Democracy in Disguise', ie, the society gets together to vote on certain practices and decides what is right and what is not. I believe it completely is. The society then enforces these moral values and gives a hard time to anyone who does not confirm to them.

This does not mean there wont be people like Raja RamMohan Rai who see through the fallacies in society's norms and are not afraid to go against it to bring about progressive change. There will always be people brave enough to stand up against the society and do all kinds of immoral acts, if that is what it takes for them to shake up the society and show it its own shortcomings. Society does need to be shaken and shaken pretty hard at times, because society by itself is a dumb and very deaf individual, it does not hear most of things you say to it unless you shake it up hard enough.