Neutrality isn’t neutral
August 3, 2012 § 15 Comments
A person who adopts a position of neutrality on a moral question, doesn’t.
Presume that we have before us a moral question, for which there is a good answer and a bad answer. A person who adopts a position of neutrality on the question is respecting both the good answer and the bad answer. As a result, the person who has adopted a position of neutrality has made the bad answer appear more respectable. Adopting a position of moral neutrality means respecting the bad answer.
Supporting neutrality with respect to moral questions, then, results in making evil more socially acceptable and good less so. In fact when neutrality is seen to be a good in itself, it is tantamount to supporting evil and undermining the good.
Respecting persons who are wrong is a different matter, of course. But adopting moral neutrality as a means to the end of respecting persons, is evil.