Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and
my judgment and never do harm to anyone. - Hippocrates
On this page:
Golden & non-aggression rules
Foundations of morality
The Law
Final thoughts
What is moral? What is immoral? How can two parties be at odds, each believing they are right, when chances
are one of them is wrong. Assuming they are faced with same information, I suggest it is because they are
applying different standards of right and wrong. I've outlined the weaknesses of the two more popular
principles and an objective standard which, I hope makes a lot of sense once it is brought to the surface. There
will always be human differences in perception and interpretation of events, but just as we need a common
understanding of words to communicate, we need a common understanding of morality to behave morally.
In an ideal world, everybody gets along in peace and harmony. For the most part we do. The proof is in the
quality of our complex and advanced civilization. It takes an extraordinary amount of social cooperation to
operate at this level. For that reason, this article will emphasize social cooperation.
Fundamentally we cooperate with others because we have an unquenchable instinct for wanting to improve our
future circumstances over our present circumstances. If we tried it alone, we could do no better then survive at
a primitive level. Grouping together enables us to benefit from the output of time and skills we don't have. By
working together or by exchanging with others produces more output then any of us could do alone.
We trade when we are willing to give up something of less value for something of more value. Society
advances materially through countless trades. This is why civilization evolved into a market society; no other
way works better.
Yes, there are slackers, incompetents and the helpless. Fortunately a market society has the surpluses to
afford charity. Otherwise that class is outside the scope of this article. Our concern here is for the antithesis of
peace and harmony: violence and disharmony.
At the core of violence and disharmony is another facet of our nature: the urge to dominate and control. It
manifests to different degrees at every level of society, from individuals to nations. Most times we recognize it
when we see it. But it is more difficult to see it when it is in us. This is where principles of morality can provide
an objective standard by which to regulate our behavior. It is not a perfect technique, but it's a vast
improvement over letting thoughtless feelings rule our behavior.
There are approximately six billion people in this world, each with a unique set of values. It might seem most
comfortable if everybody shared agreeable values, but that is never going to happen. If we are frustrated
enough, we might first try persuasion by reasoning, pleading or scolding. Obviously we are going to meet with
limited success. This is where the temptation to use aggressive methods enters our consciousness. Civility ends
where coercion starts.
Where coercion starts, self defense begins. No one argues about the moral right to self defense. Stopping
aggression is form of self preservation and fundamental to common law.
Competition is as fundamental to nature as it is to a market economy as it is to sports. Athletes compete by
agreed upon rules. Men and women compete in the affairs of the heart. Workers compete for jobs. Businesses
compete for market share. Politicians compete for office. Nations compete globally. Animals compete for food.
Religious dogma belies any claim that belief in God leads to a more moral society. The dogma of sin is so petty,
arbitrary and undefined, as to be meaningless. For a God father or any father to send his innocent son to die
for the guilty, perverts the meaning of justice. The idea of eternal punishment hell is meant to constrain by
intimidation but it's horribly unjust.
There isn't a system of organization more corrupt then government. Ostensibly governments fulfill the role of
defense, to protect our life, liberty and property from the predations of criminals and foreign nations. In
practice, it's been perverted into a system of fraud, corruption, plunder, persecution and mass murder. No
other type of organization has brought more misery to the human race then government. Whether civilization
evolves to find that happy balance between too much and too little government is anybody's guess. Right now
it's choking us.
There is a tendency for people when they get attached to something, they'll defend it as if they were its
mother. Moral behavior is not predicated on who the actors are; it is based on actions no matter whom or what
the actors are. Objective reasoning requires that we think in terms of X and Y, not me or you or them or us.
THE LAW
The Law by Frederic Bastiat is an excellent 75 page booklet on law and morals. The book can also be read
on the web. This is a sample.
The Complete Perversion of the Law
But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper
functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further
than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own
objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and
destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal
of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted
plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to
punish lawful defense.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The term "pecking order" describes the hierarchy among birds based on aggressive pecking in which the most
dominant bird out pecks all others, the second most dominant bird out pecks all the others, and so on down
the hierarchy. Human society is structured according to pecking order.
At the top of the human pecking order is the nation-state. With organized police and military to support it, it
has a monopoly on the use of force. Ideally, it is a necessity to protect person, property and liberty. In practice
it has been the source of the world's worst evils: war, plunder and persecution.
How did it get this way? Most people do not believe that power is evil when employed by States. They
condemn common criminals. They condemn the imaginary power of free-market capitalism. But they glorify
their State. I'm going to make an amateur psychologist assertion that State power brings a sense of vicarious
power and belonging. The same psychology applies to religion, where true believers get a sense of fulfillment
in 'knowing' somebody powerful is looking after their welfare.
Power draws persons to a particular religious faith and political ideology. With power comes aggression. They
feel more of a sense of power as their cause becomes more powerful. This is what I believe leads to wars and
persecutions.
To think of oneself as an independent individual requires an ability to tolerate a certain amount of isolation. I
am me-period. Most cannot do it, even when they have a satisfying social life.
Whether or not this is going to change in the distant future does us no good in the here and now. I take the
position that evil cannot be reduced unless there is a critical mass of people who recognize it. Until that day
comes if ever it does, awareness increases our sensitivity to it. It gives us more time to protect ourselves and
we don't contribute to it. In this way we can contribute to reducing it.
End