“Oneness and the Foundations of Ethics”: An Enlightening Presentation of Sikh Morality with Dr. Keshav Singh
The Presentation
As many ethical hobbyists and academics have probably studied ad nauseam, the Western philosophers that we know and love (or viscerally abhor), such as Immanuel Kant and David Hume, devoted their lives to tackling what are among the most daunting moral considerations. Most notably for our purposes, though, is the infamous “why be moral?” question.
For many, these guys never got the answers quite right. At the very least, some may experience general discomfort with the idea that immorality can never be in our self-interest, or that acting morally for self-interested reasons is perfectly acceptable. For Dr. Keshav Singh – a UNC Chapel Hill alumnus and assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama at Birmingham – there’s a sound explanation for such Western philosophical shortcomings.
On Tuesday, October 5th, the Parr Center for Ethics welcomed Dr. Singh back to Chapel Hill for an engaging discussion of why one should be moral according to the Sikh ethical tradition under which he was raised.
Dr. Singh’s lecture began with a presentation of the classic Western solutions to the “why be moral” issue and concluded with an alternative moral perspective offered by the Sikh tradition. As he highlighted, Western philosophers come from a tradition of strong individualism, wedded to the notion that each person is a fundamentally separate individual that is not inherently bound to any unified whole.
While many see strong individualism as a fundamental aspect of what it means to be an autonomous person, we may have reason to view it as a unique aberration of the West. For Dr. Singh, part of what leads to dissatisfaction and uncomfortability with Western solutions to moral questions is the tension between a sense of moral universalism and the Western notion of strong individualism.
Sikh metaphysics rejects this sense of strong individualism, asserting that oneness precedes individuality. While Sikhism holds that personal identity is not illusory, the level at which we are individuals is less important than the level at which we are one.
Via the Sikh tradition, spiritual enlightenment comes from connecting with and acknowledging the presence of the divine, which is essentially oneness. When viewing humanity as a fundamentally unified body of oneness, it is neither sensical nor intuitive to explain morality in terms of self-interest in the ways that Western philosophers are prone to. Thus, to smooth the tensions surfaced by Western approaches to morality, Dr. Singh urges us to take these proposed considerations of oneness much more seriously.
I encourage anyone interested in the details of Dr. Singh’s argument to read this Psyche piece that the brand-new Speaker Series pod, of which I am a proud member, had the unique experience of discussing prior to attending Dr. Singh’s lecture and meeting him over lunch.
Meeting with Professor Singh
As a brand new Ethics Fellow, I was pleasantly surprised to hear that the owner of a familiar name, “Dr. Singh,” would be our first speaker of the academic year. Funnily enough, I had already read two of his works – a paper, Evidentialism doesn’t make an exception for belief, and an unfinished draft, There is No Pragmatic (or Moral) Encroachment – in an epistemology course (PHIL 335) the semester prior. Although his recent presentation did not concern itself with epistemic considerations, I was able to learn more about Dr. Singh’s background and passions beyond epistemology.
What’s more, upon interacting with the man behind the big words, I learned that Dr. Singh is approachable, amiable, and perceptive. I inquired about the intersection of ethics and epistemology while he shared stories with me about his experience obtaining a Ph.D. in philosophy, all between sips of a vibrantly blue butterfly pea matcha that allegedly tastes like cereal milk. (After trying it for myself the day after, I can confirm. I’m still unsure how to feel about it.)
It was a unique and fulfilling feeling to meet the author of papers that, to some degree or another, contributed fuel to the growing flame that is my interest in theories of knowledge. Meeting Dr. Singh made the palpable distance I sometimes feel between myself and the world of academic philosophers feel smaller. Reporting back to my former professor about the encounter minimized said distance even further.
I’m not entirely sure how or where I’ll find myself down the postgraduate road, but I’ve already been sufficiently inspired by my limited experiences with the Parr Center to continue pursuing that which makes me feel at home. For those who are also easily intimidated – by unassuming pedestrians, academic philosophers, or both – I would encourage you to reach out to someone you’re intimidated by (in a good way). Who knows, they may just have some valuable life (or ethical) lessons to share with you!