In Which We Think About the Morality of Pietas, Kind Of

Rohrbacher wrote a comment on one of my drafts in the pietas section about one of the Ross quotations I used. The quotation is: "We must keep in mind, as we encounter the 'pious' hero, that there is nothing in the Roman concept that suggests religious or spiritual devotion, no sense of moral or ethical rightness. Pietas means 'duty,' plain and simple" (Ross 79). Rohrbacher's comment is: Boy, this seems a little strong, don't you think--no sense of moral rightness to be pius?

I'm not sure what to do with this. First, I don't know whether or not I agree with Ross' statement fully. So for myself I'm not sure how to respond to Rohrbacher. And from a slightly different angle, just because it's strong does not necessarily make it bad. Rohrbacher does not have to agree with everything I say. To me, doing your duty may be a matter of "rightness"--in other words, it is morally good to be dutiful, but the process of being dutiful and the duty you owe someone is not necessarily morally upright. Example: respecting your parents is morally a good thing, but if you owe obedience to your family and your dad tells you to beat your younger brother, that is not morally right.

So, is Ross oversimplifying? Possibly. But I don't know how to handle that. That's all.

Thinking.