THE EXCHANGE. Have we lost sense of right and wrong?

As 2017 draws to a close I thought of putting behind the dryness of numbers, economy and regulations to reflect on some aspects of social behaviour as we see them today. How people of means or standing make choices on doing what’s right versus what is convenient, ultimately reflects in the health of society as a whole. Even if in many instances there may not be moral conflicts, there is still a clear distinction between what’s right or convenient.

Some people often convince themselves on the surface that they are right in a given situation, even if they realise at a deeper level that they may not be; this gap allows them to discard the right, more so if they face no serious consequences for having done so.

Fear of immediate pain or desire for future gain may also prevent them from doing what they ought to. So, the choice of the convenient over the right can become easier. The world is made a worse place when people start believing that convenience is more important than integrity.

Some observations on societal behaviour may appear unconnected, but there are some common threads — such as the non-existent civic sense, self-centricity, an inflated sense of intellect and self-importance, a penchant for jugaad — that run through these. Recognition is the first stage of cure, so one must hope that collective conscience and virtuous nudging will mitigate the ills.

Almost on a daily basis there are reports from across the nation about how educated civilians not only abdicate responsibility from doing what a civilised person is expected to do during an emergency faced by another, but derive some shocking satisfaction from the situation.

I can refer to a case where a hapless Swiss couple beaten up in a northern State was not helped by those nearby, who instead shot videos on smartphones until the police arrived. Nearer home, a close relative travelling with her teenaged daughter slipped from the stairs of a Coffee Day and cracked her skull, critically endangering her. The reasonably well-to-do patrons did no better than video the victim and her crying daughter.

Mercifully, an officer of the firm Oracle (a Arjun Barge) had the tremendous civic sense and responsibility to rush her to a hospital probably saving her life for the moment (she continues to be critical on date). Shouldn’t Mr Barge’s actions be the rule rather than an exception ?

If any bystander — God forbid — had similar misfortune, would he expect shabby treatment from those around him or would he want far better? Of course, it is easy to justify inaction on the basis that authorities are more likely to hound a do-gooder or seek rent; but that should be a reason to collectively seek accountability from the powers that be, rather than not one’s discharging duty.

On the positive side, stories abound on how people of insubstantial means or often very basic education come forward —without hesitation and at great exertion — to help others in time of need or calamity. By all estimates they often put the well-to-do and educated classes to shame.

Day after day, increasingly, we are subject to the cacophony of mainstream media that is turning increasingly to commentary over factual reporting. Commentary by its very nature is subjective; but coming from what is considered to be an “acceptable” source, people find it easy to accept it as fact. Truth can suffer, untruth can sell — both are often to our own detriment.

At the same time, humans increasingly take to (relying on) social media as their window on the world, as well as their personal megaphone pointed at the rest of the world. Their expressions as articulated have taken a harsher turn, and are more often abusive than not. Direct human interactions have taken a backseat and general patience is now related to mouse clicks or thumb-speed on a smartphone. These cannot be signs of a healthy culture.

There are no indisputable role models in society, because a Google search is certain to provide sufficient material to dilute any respectable aura. At the same time, a declining tenor of political public discourse worldwide sets a poor example, and people find it easier to be un-parliamentary in thought and word.

How will society address such failings, until it makes a conscious effort to return to the inherent values of any progressive society ?

We do not have to rely on less-than-optimal examples around the globe to rationalise our own failings — there are enough positive examples of sound civic sense and discourse. As Leo Tolstoy advocated “wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it”.

Another nightmare that most of us suffer on a daily basis is the chaos and absurdity of vehicular traffic literally all across the country. A similar level of macho disorderliness descends upon us in queues — whether to get on a plane, get into a lift or simply to get into a movie hall. Other than respond in similar fashion when my pain exceeds tolerance, I have yet to figure out the best way to address what a sane person would classify as insanity.

I believe only the surface has been scratched here. The objective is not to vilify our circumstances since much good thrives too. But our conduct in matters that have greater resonance in mature societies, at some point, will be seen as a deeper indicator of our own values. We all crave to be an upright society but disregard that we need to demonstrate virtues that will make us one.

To close on a cinematic narrative, I paraphrase the upright King of Jerusalem (from Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven ), “A king may move a man, but that man can also move himself... when you stand before God you cannot say ‘Virtue was not convenient at the time’. This will not suffice”.

There, perhaps, lies a learning for all of us.

The writer is an entrepreneur and past president of FICCI. The views are personal