What are the dangers of conventional morality?

The reasons why we cannot be content with our fathers’ conservatism in morals, and our fathers’ custom-bound conscience, may be summarized as follows: 

(1) Conventional morality is almost necessarily too general; it is not elastic enough to fit the infinite variations in specific cases, not detailed enough to fit all needs.  It therefore often causes needless and cruel repression; the most sensitive and aspiring spirits have often revolted from the morality of their times because of its harshness.  It is well for the marriage-tie to be binding; divorce has generally been deemed unchristian.  But if this judgment is rigidly enforced, special cases arise, very piteous, very pathetic, crying out for a more discriminating rule.  Our forebears, with their grave realization of the dangers of frivolousness, forbade by law and a stern public opinion many innocent and wholesome diversions.  Such injustices are inevitable where custom has unchecked sway.  The general aim and result may be very salutary, but the application is too sweeping, and brings suffering to many unfortunate individuals, or to the community as a whole, by its indiscrimination.

(2) But even in its general result custom may be harmful.  Morals have developed blindly, as we have seen, through all sorts of irrational influences, swayed this way by class interest, by rulers or priests, veered that way by superstition, passion, and stupidity.  Morality has not understood itself; and the natural forces which have developed it into its enormous usefulness have not always weeded out the baneful elements.  The persecution of heretics was sheer mistake, but it was acceded to by practically the entire Church in the Middle Ages, and practiced with utter conscientiousness.  The hostility of the Puritans to music and art was pure folly, though it seemed to them their grim duty.

(3) New situations are continually arising, new sins appearing.  Conventional morality, while sometimes over-severe against old and well-recognized sins, lags far behind in its branding of the newer forms.  The evils arising from the modern congestion of population, the unscrupulousness of modern business, the selfishness of politicians, the servility of newspapers to the “interests” and to advertisers, for example, find too little reprobation in our established moral codes.  “Business is business” has been said by respectable church-members.  A successful American boss, when asked if he was not in politics for his pocketbook, said, “Of course!  Aren’t you?” with no sense of shame.  Probably he was very “moral” along the old lines, an excellent father, a kind husband, an agreeable neighbor; but his conventional code, shared by most of his contemporaries, did not include the reprobation of the practice of politics for private gain.  In the upper classes are many people who are “good” by the old standards, but who are unhelpful and trivial-minded,