So, you think you have Rights?  

Okay, now, if you were asked what your rights are, what would your answer be? Freedom? The right to decide what to do and what not to do; and when and where and why to do it? To decide whom to marry. Decide to smoke or not to smoke. To have sex. Watch pornography. And the list would go on and on and on. …

But, wait. Before we go on with your never-ending list, let’s look at a few other matters: moral, value, norms, ethics, absolute and relative.

MORAL, to me, is universal, not written, about right/wrong, good/bad. We usually have it in stories; remember those Moral Stories? It usually ends with “and the moral of the story is …”

I guess this is how it started. Someone tells a kid: “You shouldn’t lie” and the kid asks: “Why?” So this someone creates a story: “Well, you see, once upon a time, there was this boy who liked to tell lies. …” Maybe that would be the story about The Boy Who Cried Wolf. That someone would end the story with: “So, you see, the moral of the story is do not tell lies because when later you tell the truth, people won’t believe you.”

You don’t get this sort of stories in one community or in one society or in one country only. It’s all over the world. One good example: The Tortoise And The Hare story. We have many version of that story. It’s a universal story … a story with a moral.

More examples of Moral are: respect others, work hard, love animals, have pity, don’t be greedy, be humble, don’t steal and don’t cheat. There are many more … you can think of more examples, I believe.

Basically, all these moral elements come in the form of stories. If you do good, you get good in return. Moral tells you what is right and what is wrong. But it is not written anywhere that you must not lie, you must respect others etc. those moral elements are just globally accepted; therefore universal.

VALUES, on the other hand, is family oriented. So, it’s not surprising that we usually call it “family values”. It refers to things that you learn at home; anything at all. Don’t worry if what your parents teach you is different from what your friend learnt from his/her parents. Values are not universal. Different families in different society, different country, different environment, different background, different social status etc have different values.

Values are not universal. Values are also not written. For example, when your mum tells you that you are not allowed to wear your shoes inside the house, you can’t ask “Where does it say so?” because it is not written anywhere that you are not suppose to wear shoes inside the house. (And, mind you, it’s rude to question your parents!)

Let’s say your mum or dad tells you that you must finish your dinner before you are allowed to watch television. You’d know by now that it’s not written anywhere that you have to finish your dinner before you can watch TV. But if you ask the question “Why?” your parents know the best answer: “Because I say so!”

That would work very well with kids but once you’re a teenager, your parents would come up with a longer sentence. If you ask “Why?” they’d say: “Look here young man/lady, ask long as you stay under this roof, you listen to what I say.”

Fair enough.

Oh, as if parents are not enough to teach you ‘values”, you also have your grandparents, aunts and uncles, elder brothers and elder sisters. Step parents and step brothers/sisters are also included. They have the right to tell you what to do and what not to do.

But don’t worry. Family Values are meant to teach you all the good things. They’re like small rules that you must follow. Take it easy. Wash your hands before and after you eat. Brush your teeth. Take bath. Do your homework before watching TV. Don’t hang on the phone too long. No lepak-ing with friends. Flush after you use the toilet. Don’t fight with your brothers/sisters. Don’t tell lies. Wash your own school shoes. Don’t leave your toys lying around. Don’t go outside nude. Don’t climb the rambutan tree.

Does it hurt to follow such rules? And, oh, yes! Usually, if you break the ‘rules’ set by your parents, you get punished.

These family values would also include elements of religion, culture, custom, law, norms, manners and everything under the sun. all this prepares you to face the world, to become part of the society, to behave well in public. Well, parents don’t want people to look at you and ask, “Didn’t your parents teach you manners?”

But, as mentioned earlier, values change from one family to another. For example, one family might insist that the children must be home by 10 pm but another family might say, be home by midnight.

Think of the values in your family and compare with those in your friend’s family … and you’d understand what I mean. But you are not suppose to ask, “How come my friend can lepak but you don’t allow me?” coz your parents can simply start a lecture with “Look here young man …”

Family values can change according to time, place and situation. For example, when you were small, your parents would say a big NO to smoking. But after you reach 18, your parents might not stop you. But then, if you accept the value that smoking is not good, then it becomes your Personal Value and you decide not to smoke even after you’re 18.

Another example would be sex. When you were still a kid, parents say NO to sex. Even when you’re a teenager. But maybe a little more open. But when comes the time, parents would expect you to know about sex and sexuality. And please don’t tell me there are parent who tell their children not to have sex even after marriage!

My point is: family value changes.

Compare what your great grandparents would have told your grandparents. What your grandparents would have told your parents. And what your parents told you. There might be some values which has been passed through generation. Some values might have changed according to time, place, situation, social status etc.

And think of the values that you’d be teaching your children. And they to their children. Would it be okay to have sex before marriage? Would pornography be allowed? Would there be more open talks between parents and children about sex and sexuality? What about values/family rules regarding handphones and the internet?

Remember, someday you will be a parent and then you know how important Family Value is! All the best, people …

NORMS are the rules in the society. It’s no more family oriented but society oriented. It’s not universal because different society have different norms. It’s also not written but is accepted by the society. But now, we do have some written norms. For example, do not wear shoes/slippers in a temple. Since too many non-Hindus tend to enter temple with footwear, most temple committee came up with the idea of putting up a notice.

Shoes are allowed in church. But not in temple and mosque. This proves that norms are not universal … different society have different norms. Indeed, some church don’t allow shoes. See? More proof that norms are not universal.

When discussing about norms, think of a village. Let’s say it’s a kampung with Malay people; Muslims. Imagine their normal way of dressing. Tudung for the ladies. In the family, parents would teach their daughters to wear tudung.

Once these daughters are in the society, mix with the kampung people, they would know how to dress. Must wear tudung when going out.

Let’s say everyone in that kampung follow that rule: ladies wear tudung. So there’s no problem. There’s a balanced society. So, you see, norms create a balanced society.

But let’s say one fine day, one lady decides to go to pasar without her tudung. Now, that’s abnormal in that kampung. What would happen? Others would give her the ‘look’. Some might scold her. Others might avoid her; even boycott her. Or they might complain to the penghulu or ketua kampung. And action would be taken accordingly. That lady might be warned.

So, you see, in a balanced society, everything’s fine. When someone comes up with something different, it effect the balance. So, there’s reaction. Every action has an equal reaction. In the end, the balance is reached again. Like that lady who took off her tudung. She was made to wear her tudung again.

Or let’s say that lady did not walk in public without tudung but instead she wore a fashionable tudung. Something new in that kampung. People might have given her the ‘look’ in the beginning. But people could accept it because she’s still wearing tudung and not revealing her aurat. So, she can continue with the fashionable tudung. And who knows, others might follow her. So, there’s change in the balanced society. But it’s acceptable.

If the society can accept and tolerate what you do, then it’s okay. Norms refer to what the society expects from you; your behaviour etc. People can accept changes. So, norms change.

For example, maybe last time if lovers hug or hold hands in public, the society could not accept it; it’s against the norms of the balanced society. But now, it’s okay; the public can accept it.

Just compare the changes in your society ten years ago, five years ago and now. The topic of gay and lesbian for example. How’s the reaction in your society? But what if a person wants to walk nude? Can your society accept it? What about premarital sex? Pornography? Littering? Lepak? Rock music or Black Metal?

Anyway, norms change according to the society. One society would encourage beef while another would say no. Some could accept changes, some can’t.

If you’re in a nude camp, you’d be the odd one if you dress fully, right? So, adopt to the society. Or set a trend and make people follow. If the society can tolerate the trend that you set, it would soon become part of the norm. If the society can’t accept, you will have to change … or get disowned.

Now, let’s look at ETHICS. These are written rules. It’s in black and white. It tells you what you can do, must do, can’t do, mustn’t do etc. If you break the rule, there sure is punishment.

Think of a contract. A person signs a contract to work for a company for one year. But if the company decides to get rid of him after six months, the contract would protect the employee. Same goes if that guy decides to leave after seven months. Everything would be stated clearly in the contract.

Lawyers, doctors, journalists etc too have ethics. Of course they have different ethics. This means, ethics are not universal. But it sure is written. It’s strict rules and regulations.

Schools have ethics … school rules. But different school have slightly different rules. And school rules are different from college rules. Even different colleges have different rules. Right?

If you’re a student in HELP Institute, you follow the HELP Institute rules/ethics. If you’re a student in ICOM, you follow the ICOM rules/ethics. If you’re a student in LICT, you follow the LICT rules/ethics. PRIME College would have a different set of ethics/rules. Same goes with The One Academy. You follow the ethics/rules in your college. Logic, right? And if you break the rules, you get punished. Fair and square. And if the college breaks the rule, you as a student have the right to take action … according to the set rules.

Journalists are to report the truth. But even ethics of a journalist change according to place: country, company, government etc. If the newspaper belongs to a certain political party, you’d be asked to write good things only about that party. And if you work with a tabloid that writes gossips, you have to adopt to the ‘ethic’ of that publication. You can’t say, journalist must only tell the truth! You have to follow the ethics of that particular publication.

Now you can see the difference of MORAL, NORMS, VALUES and ETHICS. Of course, at time they have a lot in common. For example, “Do not lie” … that could come under Moral, Value, Norms and also Ethic.

While I was explaining, you must have realized that I mentioned Values, Norms and Ethics change according to time, place, situation etc. But what about Moral? Does it change even if it’s universal?

Let’s take an example: lie. Morally, it’s wrong to lie, it’s not good to lie. But let’s say one man suddenly comes into our lecture hall – holding a parang – and asks angrily  “Who is Alvin?”

Alvin is sitting just next to you. What would you say?

We face the question of ABSOLUTE and RELATIVE.

Absolute means, in my own words, “if it’s right, then it’s right no matter who says it, when it was said etc and if it’s wrong, then it’s wrong …”

So, the man with the parang asks who’s Alvin. If Moral is Absolute, then it’s wrong to lie and it’s right to tell the truth. You have to tell the man who Alvin is. Bye bye Alvin. Hope to see you in Heaven!

Meanwhile, Relative is more humane … and more down to earth. In my own words, Relative means that things change according to place, situation, reason, people etc.

Back to the man with the parang and our dear friend, Alvin. I know that it’s wrong to tell a lie. But how can I tell the man with the parang who Alvin is? Alvin might get killed. Or hurt. Or, worse still, since I’m seated next to him, I get hurt too!

So, I use my brain and decide that it’s okay to tell a little lie to that man with the parang. For the sake of my friend.

Now, let’s look at more terms which are related to our discussion; this time in Bahasa Malaysia.

Nilai Instrumental (Instrumental Values)

Kualiti yang diterima atau ditolak sebagai alat mencapai sesuatu matlamat. Contohnya, mengebom Hiroshima dan Nagasaki untuk menamatkan Perang Dunia Kedua atau mengenakan hukuman bunuh kepada pengedar dadah bagi menghapuskan kegiatan pengedaran dadah.

Nilai Intrinsik (Intrinsic Values)

Kualiti yang diterima atau ditolak semata-mata kerana ia baik atau buruk tanpa mengambil kira kesannya. Contohnya, seorang hakim menjatuhkan hukuman gantung sampai mati kepada seorang pengedar dadah semata-mata kerana kewajipannya berbuat demikian mengikut peruntukan undang-undang yang ada, bukan kerana dia ingin turut sama membasmi kegiatan pengedaran dadah.

Nilai Subjektif (Subjective Values)

Kualiti yang diterima atau ditolak oleh seseorang yang memberi pandangan. Contohnya, kes Amerika Syarikat menyerang Afghanistan. Britain menyatakan bahawa ia perlu demi membasmi kegiatan pengganas. Tetapi ada negara mengatakan ia tidak wajar kerana akan menyebabkan ramai rakyat Afghanistan yang tidak berdosa turut terkorban 

Nilai Objektif (Objective Values)

Kualiti yang bernilai atau sebaliknya tetapi bebas daripada pilihan sendiri. Contohnya, peperangan adalah satu tragedi yang dashyat, perhambaan tidak mencerminkan nilai perikemanusiaan, buruh kanak-kanak adalah satu kezaliman dan mesti dihapuskan.

Nilai Relatif (Relative Values)

Nilai yang diterima atau ditolak oleh peraturan sesuatu masyarakat untuk mencapai sesuatu matlamat masyarakat berkenaan. Misalnya, di Malaysia, sebuah keluarga boleh dibina hanya melalui perkahwinan rasmi tetapi di Amerika Syarikat, keluarga boleh dibentuk tanpa perlu berkahwinsecara sah/rasmi. All values are relative to time, place, person and situation. Morality varies from culture to culture and from individual to individual and we ought to respect other people’s moral views.

Nilai Absolute/Mutlak (Absolute Values)

Nilai yang keberhargaannya tidak terikat kepada sesuatu masyarakat kebiasaan dalam sesuatu masyarakat. Misalnya, hidup berkeluarga adalah satu amalan kehidupan yang baik. Ia diterima oleh semua sebagai suatu nilai yang baik. “Do not kill” is an absolute value that never changes. Absolute values applies for all time and to all human being everywhere. “Absolute” here means “not to be doubted or questioned” or ‘positive, certain and unconditional”.

Utilitarianisme (Utilitarianism)

Memaksimumkan kebahagiaan atau keseronokan untuk bilangan orang yang banyak – bukan untuk diri sendiri sahaja. Contohnya, kita membenarkan tanah kita diambil oleh kerajaan untuk membuat lebuh raya yang akan memberi kebaikan kepada ramai orang. Ataupun, pengeboman Hiroshima dan Nagasaki membawa kebaikan kepada penduduk Asia Tenggara kerana Jepun menyerah kalah walaupun perbuatan mengebom itu mengorbankan nyawa.

Egotisme (Egoism)

Nilai baik jika menguntungkan atau membawa keseronokan kepada diri sendiri. Sesuatu nilai dianggap tidak baik jika merugikan diri sendiri. Bukan melihat kepada kebaikan bagi orang ramai. Misalnya, seorang remaja menganggap tidak salah menonton filem lucah kerana memberi keseronokan kepada dirinya.

Teori Deontologi (Theory of Deontology)

Dalam bahasa Greek, “deontos” bermakna “duty” atau “tugas/tanggungjawab”. Menurut teori ini, seseorang melakukan sesuatu atau tidak melakukannya semata-mata kerana pekara itu difikirkannya baik atau buruk, bukan kerana ada sesuatu kesan peribadi akibat perbuatan itu. Pertama, ‘Prinsip Duty’ (Principle of Duty) iaitu apabila seseorang melaksanakan tanggungjawab atau tugas yang diberi semata-mata kerana mengikut arahan bagi melaksanakan tugas itu. Duty for the sake of duty. Misalnya tentera Amerika Syarikat yang terlibat dalam mengebom Hiroshima dan Nagasaki melakukannya kerana melaksanakan tugas yang diberi. Kedua, ‘Prinsip Eksistensialisme’ (Principle of Existentialism) di mana nilai baik atau buruk mesti berasaskan kepada pilihan setiap individu secara bebas; pilihan peribadi dan bukannya dipaksa. Misalnya apabila kita menderma untuk tabung kebajikan. Ia menjadi nilai yang baik jika kita menderma secara sukarela tetapi menjadi nilai yang tidak baik jika kita menderma kerana dipaksa atau kerana terpaksa.

We’ve discussed about Moral, Values, Norms and Ethics. And I’m sure you noticed  I mentioned that these elements change according to place, situation, reason etc. which means, Moral, Values, Norms and Ethics are Relative and not Absolute.

You have Moral. You follow Family Values. You obey to Norms in the society. You ikut Ethics according to where you study/work/are. Fine.

And don’t forget about Religion, Beliefs, Culture and Law.

Well then, what Rights do you have? How would you define your Rights?

In my own words, you have the Right to say/do anything you want as long as you follow Moral, Values, Norms, Ethics, Religion, Culture, Beliefs and the Law. And keep in mind about Relativity.

Let’s see … one person might say he has the right to smoke. His parents don’t stop him. The public … not bothered. But he’s under 18. So, the Law says no. This means, he does not have the right to smoke. No matter what he or his family say, according to the Law, he does not have the right to smoke; since he’s under 18.

What about pornography, sex, drugs and all those things teens are so much eager to try? What is the right age?

Think of more examples and look at it from the angle of Moral, Values, Norms, Ethics, Religion etc to know if you really have the Right.

Bear in mind that Moral is Relative, Values are Relative, Norms are Relative, Ethics are Relative, Religions are Relative, Beliefs are Relative, Culture is Relative, and mind you, the Law is also Relative.

Also bear in mind that with Rights and Freedom comes Responsibility. You thinks that you're old enough to smoke, be responsible. You have no right to force others to smoke as well. You have no right to smoke in no smoking areas. You must respect the right of the non smokers.

You think you are old enough and have the right to have sex or to get married. But remember that you have no right to force others to have sex with you. That'd be rape. You have the right to love and to be loved but you have no right to force others to love or to marry you.

You have the right to sex? Well then, be responsible. Whatever you do, be safe. That's what I tell my son. And I tell you the same.

You want to walk nude? Do it in your house; not in public. You think your religion is the greatest? Fine. But you have no right to condemn other religions. You hate durian? Fine. But don't stop others from eating durian.

We have Law and we have Constitution. And whatever you do, please remember that walls have ears and eyes! 

So, now, people, what Right do you have left?

Who is Uthaya Sankar SB?

To go to the main page, click HERE