To: et.letters@telegraph.co.uk
Re: Feigned sickness at the workplace is symptomatic of a sick society
Date: Sunday 11 January 04

Dear Sir/Madam,

Like Britain's high crime levels, the rifeness of feigned sickness at the workplace is symptomatic of a sick society. And the fact that both are increasing is a sure indication that it is getting even sicker ("13,434 years lost on sick leave in 2002. And that's just the civil service...").

It is not the kind of sickness that better health care can cure, but spiritual and moral sickness, which is built into and reflected in the fabric and structure of society and its economy.

The very words spiritual and moral turn many people off; perhaps because those who use them are often so obviously spiritually and morally sick themselves - the blind presuming to lead the blind.

The loss of community and religious belief in modern mass society has left the majority of people morally confused and disorientated; with the media, film and TV stepping into the vacuum, and in pursuit of ratings and commercial gain pushing back the boundaries of acceptable behaviour ever further. This, together with the imposition of multi-cultural society, has resulted in "tolerance" being elevated to the greatest moral principle, glossing over a deeply unsatisfactory and ultimately untenable situation, one which is responsible in no small measure for the dramatic erosion of morals and the observed increase in amoral, asocial, anti-social and criminal behaviour.

It is not that long ago that most people believed in the Bible as the Word of God and the authoritative moral guide; but not any longer. Christian morality is too closely associated with the establishment, and with Christian doctrines and theology, which most people nowadays, with good reason, either ignore or reject.

What we need - those of us who have grown up a little - are new, revitalised and more enlightened concepts of God and morality (right behaviour); not ones formulated centuries ago, sanctified by divine authority and imposed from above, but ones which we work out, debate and agree upon among ourselves. 

How are we to agree? By having as many concepts of God and morality as are needed and founding a multitude of religious societies based upon them; with everyone free to join the society of their choice, if it accepts them, or alternatively, to found their own.

Our concepts of God are very, and in many ways exclusively, personal. Morality too is very personal, but also intrinsically social. Your concept of God (or lack of it) need not concern me or others; but your morals (i.e. your behaviour and the principles that guide and determine it), do - at least in as far as they affect me and others.

Instead of balking at the mention of "morals" (or if you prefer your English derived from Greek rather than Latin, "ethics"), we need to remind ourselves of what these words actually mean, or originally meant, i.e. "right" or "acceptable" behaviour. 

We tend to associate "morals" with society (particularly parents, teachers, priests etc.) imposing, or trying to impose, its morals on ourselves, which makes us feel that we are being treated like children, and thus turn away. But if you look at "morals"  as an adult, with the freedom and strength of character to decide for yourself what to accept and reject as "right behaviour", you will realise that it is a subject of both great interest and importance.