Dizzying Heights of Moral High Grounds

My absolute favourite dialogue from Schitt's Creek (which is also my most absolute favourite show) is when Moira Rose warns her husband, “Be careful, John, lest you suffer vertigo from the dizzying heights of the moral ground.”

I hear this dialogue and nod vigorously, every single time.

Is it just me or has our need to take moral high grounds increased? There's a sudden pressure to take a stand on everything. God forbid, you are indifferent to something. Oh by the way, you don't just have to not be indifferent, you also have to share the exact same high ground with everyone with the exact same opinion.

Logically speaking, I see two problems with this amazing situation we find ourselves in.

First Problem: The higher the moral ground you take, the higher the chances you will fall off it. 

True for anything physical. True for anything philosophical. Case in point - Someone taking a stand and saying, I am always environmentally conscious, will find themselves in various situations having to defend their habits. If you care about the environment, why do you take flights? If you care about the environment, why do you eat non-veg? If you care about the environment, don't take cab rides. And so on. 

The word "always" increase the height of the moral ground by a few 100X. And hence, increases the probability of not just a fall, but a bad fall.

Second Problem: The more people taking the moral high ground, the more crowded it gets.

No one likes crowded places. And especially not when it's at a height. So, when too many people start taking the same normal ground, one of the two things happen - 

First, you try to increase the height of your moral high ground. 

"Oh you care about the environment? I am a vegan. Beat that."

So, now the new height to reach is veganism. So whoever was climbing up your height, now has to climb higher.

The other thing that can happen is, you start filtering out people to decide who gets to stay at this level. 

"You claimed you care about the environment, but you took a cruise. Please leave this moral high ground right away."

The world of indifference, on the other hand, is spectacularly underrated. Indifference does not mean not having an opinion. It could just mean that they decided their opinion is theirs to keep. Having to share it publicly and then decide how high their moral ground achievement is, does not interest them. 

Because moral ground is relative. 

For me, say, 200M is already high. I can feel my vertigo there. But for an activist, maybe, that moral ground is 1000M. And for an armchair activist, because they never really have to take action, their comfortable moral high ground is 2000M.

So should people not have opinions? Absolutely not. My only perspective on this is, think about:

1. What you are doing to change things
2. What you are getting by taking a ground that forces everyone to look up at you
3. How comfortable is it to stay at that height
4. How much worth your precious energy is to keep hanging on to that height, when you could live comfortably and happily without taking a public moral stance

Here, I quote the famous, indomitable, Keanu Reaves:

Keanu Reaves is now my gold standard of living. 

Don't engage, don't make bold statements, be happy, be indifferent. 

Care for things, but care in a way that you, personally, can act on them and look at yourself in the mirror and know you did your part. Not to take part in a discussion, where your stance forces people to crane their neck up and look at you, while you, you at the top of that dizzying moral high ground, are actually scared of heights and not really enjoying yourself either.

Now, excuse me, while I climb down my high ground and channel my inner Keanu Reaves.

Cheers

Preeks