Four Warnings

This draft has been sitting in the back of my mind for a few months. I don’t recall what originally prompted this mental thread, but in light of the recent events in Las Vegas and New Orleans, it is becoming more relevant…

There are four warnings I would like the reader to consider – four forfeitures which may place the individual and community (or both, really) in an extremely tenuous situation: the loss of ethics, legality, morality, and/or compassion.  

Loss of ethics

“A set of moral principles; a theory or system of moral values; the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group; a consciousness of moral importance…”

In many circumstances, ethics often dictate and measure the immediate response to a dilemma: what one must do upon the discovery of a misplaced wallet with cash and credit/debit cards within, encountering a lost child in a crowded venue, or a miscalculation resulting in overpayment for services or goods.

Most folks are raised with the proper course of action ingrained in their character – to either seek out the person the wallet belongs to, to comfort and remain an impromptu guardian until parental return, or to bring the accounting error to the attention of the customer or merchant. These facets of our personality come from proper parenting, Faith, plain old decency, or… for others… the fear of reprisal should the path of least resistance be embarked upon.

It could also be part of the “ethos, pathos, and logos” triangle I have written about before; a behavior is correct on principle, elicits internal peace, or just makes good sense. Human motivation on an individual and/or group level is never a perfect science and as random as it is unpredictable.

Loss of legality

“Attachment to or observance of law…”

The specter of repercussion is also something I have touched upon earlier: “repercussions and the escalation of causality.” Laws shape society as much as society creates laws. This conceptual palindrome applies to Faith as well – the expectations, rituals, and boundaries within any faith are not exactly the same as they were decades or centuries ago and may have evolved over the course of any particular belief structure. The fundamental foundation here is that any social context requires the establishment of some form of rules and consequences for individual or group deviations.

Loss of morality

“A doctrine or system of moral conduct; conformity to ideals of right human conduct…”

This ties into Faith a bit more than any others, but applies to anyone who places value on the reactions of others. Perhaps it is more of a social awareness which is associated with self-identity in comparison to a spouse, a neighborhood, or a congregation.

Loss of compassion

“Sympathetic consciousness of others’ distress together with a desire to alleviate it…”

We have experienced the frustrated question of where we last saw our wallet, experienced the immediate adrenaline dump upon the realization that a younger member of our family or group is no longer where they were a moment before, or the irritation of financial expectations not matching reality after a transaction. Therefore, we understand the perspectives of others when we may be able to offer some solution or relief.

The explanations were probably redundant, but consider a reality where the loss of ethics, legality, morality, and/or compassion is the rule and not the exception. Opportunism, remorselessness, depravity, and vengeance… the main cast of anarchy and evident throughout history in one form or another: upon the fall of an empire or State, during revolutions, when corruption prevails, or when intergroup tensions boil to the point where any previous restraints evaporate away like a snowman in a blast furnace.

I had considered expanding upon the warnings for each but considered against it. Sometimes, the scariest part of an effective story is the imagination of the audience. You get the idea.

You better.

I don’t know how to put it any clearer: we may be headed for some very interesting times, so you better start squaring yourself with your own perspectives on ethics, legality, morality, and/or compassion. What limits do you have in terms of action or reaction? What might you be capable of in terms of violations of those limits – either through your direct action or upon witnessing behavior that is deemed “too far”? How are you prepared to meet the next day in light of how you conducted yourself in regard to the previous questions? And the most important aspect: are you sure about that?

Again, we are as unpredictable as we are random. When stress increases, for most, the capacity for irrationality also increases – exponentially, if the stress is existential.

Anyone in aviation understands stress – especially if they have performed flights with students, over conflict areas, or in close proximity to those with questionable spatial awareness skills. We train for the proper reaction to those existential threats with the understanding that time is on the wrong team and going the wrong way. While we develop twisted and dark senses of humor, we understand the gravity (pun intended) of risk mitigation and accept the fact that, sometimes, participation towards an outcome – good or bad – is not optional… it is mandatory.

And we also understand that we are human and sometimes, the perceived right action was quite the wrong one needed at the wrong time, or – more fatalistically – that the actual right action at the correct time and sequence was still not enough.

This applies beyond Army Aviation… it could be infantry, it could be a tanker crew, or it could be a surgeon, a regular ol’ driver at a tricky on-ramp, or any participant in any event where there is some level of “grievous bodily harm” risk.

Pay attention, understand what is at stake, accept the risk you must, and mitigate the risk you can… but never disparage warning signs – because the four I have expanded upon are not the only ones out there.

…And there is a lot at stake.