12 Oct 2021 6:41 am
It seems typical that people pick and choose their ethics based on some instinct or whatever feels good to them.
This causes ethics To become a bizarre creation which is simultaneously arbitrary and deeply important...and the majority of modern discussions on politics seems to be centered around questions.of ethics...upon which no logic can be employed because it is merely an aesthetic feeling...and so there is no negotiation. Or is their any discussion about issues that are actually.political...such as the analysis of power or indeed even the likelihood of survival.
I think I could at least establish that the highest ethical priority must be survical...and this is for purely logical reasons.
Quite simply...it doesn't matter how 'good' you are if you don't exist. If you are a being that actually cares about having positive effects on the world...you must exist (survive) in order to accomplish this. Non existing people are no use to anyone.
Therefore if you follow some sort of eadical.pacificism where you refuse to fight even in self defense...and you are attacked by some external enemy that is not as nice as you...then they will destroy and replace you...and so your ethics managed to do nothing more than make the world a worse place.
Likewise if you are in the process of extreme dyslexic decline...where only the least capable people are reproducing and passing harmful genetics to the next generation...you must halt that and turn it around...or again you will fail to survive and just like the radical pacifists your ethics do more harm than good to the world.
Indeed I believe that all human ethics has its source in survival and biologically evolved instincts that assist survival. The anglo race tends to adopt a very individualistic and open code of ethics...and this is because their strategy for survival involved rapid development of technology...and the traits associated with himan genius are such that the anglo people must foster such an environment in order to nurture such genius. You may not realize that survival and biology is what is really dictating what you think is right or wrong...but if you examine the cause and effect of it I believe you will see that it must be so. That is how evolution works.
Meanwhile if you notice some ethical standard that is recently adopted and stifles or literally precludes survival...I suggest you investigate where it came from. I believe you will always see it comes from an external source...a competing tribe.
1 Nomination
Cannonpointer Oct 11, 2021
Go to original post on Oct 11, 2021 4:27pm
Go to nomination on Oct 12, 2021 12:42am
This causes ethics To become a bizarre creation which is simultaneously arbitrary and deeply important...and the majority of modern discussions on politics seems to be centered around questions.of ethics...upon which no logic can be employed because it is merely an aesthetic feeling...and so there is no negotiation. Or is their any discussion about issues that are actually.political...such as the analysis of power or indeed even the likelihood of survival.
I think I could at least establish that the highest ethical priority must be survical...and this is for purely logical reasons.
Quite simply...it doesn't matter how 'good' you are if you don't exist. If you are a being that actually cares about having positive effects on the world...you must exist (survive) in order to accomplish this. Non existing people are no use to anyone.
Therefore if you follow some sort of eadical.pacificism where you refuse to fight even in self defense...and you are attacked by some external enemy that is not as nice as you...then they will destroy and replace you...and so your ethics managed to do nothing more than make the world a worse place.
Likewise if you are in the process of extreme dyslexic decline...where only the least capable people are reproducing and passing harmful genetics to the next generation...you must halt that and turn it around...or again you will fail to survive and just like the radical pacifists your ethics do more harm than good to the world.
Indeed I believe that all human ethics has its source in survival and biologically evolved instincts that assist survival. The anglo race tends to adopt a very individualistic and open code of ethics...and this is because their strategy for survival involved rapid development of technology...and the traits associated with himan genius are such that the anglo people must foster such an environment in order to nurture such genius. You may not realize that survival and biology is what is really dictating what you think is right or wrong...but if you examine the cause and effect of it I believe you will see that it must be so. That is how evolution works.
Meanwhile if you notice some ethical standard that is recently adopted and stifles or literally precludes survival...I suggest you investigate where it came from. I believe you will always see it comes from an external source...a competing tribe.
1 Nomination
Cannonpointer Oct 11, 2021
Go to original post on Oct 11, 2021 4:27pm
Go to nomination on Oct 12, 2021 12:42am