CHAPTER TWO -- D Arthur M. Jackson
Copyright 2001, 2003, 2006
MORAL BEHAVIOR
.
1. In order to function as an Enlightened Person it is essential to use one's "wisdom" potential to help achieve a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning.
This goal and these behaviors aim one toward becoming their best self. These behaviors are congruent with objective reality at its deepest level; capable of satisfying; are beneficial and lasting to other people, or at least not harmful to them in such a way as to prevent them from achieving a sustainable belief that their life has meaning; and have an intent consistent with the foregoing, or at least do not cut one off from achieving these things.
Being congruent with objective reality at its deepest level means being congruent with issues that are deeper than going along with a psychotic society (e. g., Nazi Germany, fundamentalist religions, etc.). It includes being congruent with issues deeper than extending one's own life as long as possible. In this sense "sustainable" is a theoretical term that is not easy to test empirically, but should be able to be evaluated by studying implications of the term. And of course this testing needs to be done.
The foregoing ideas provide the basis to understand why pursuit of our raw "tribal" propensities are not likely to lead one to achieve a sustainable belief that their life has meaning even though surrendering to each propensity may provide deep satisfaction at least for short periods since it resonates with something very deep in the human psyche (things which allowed our hunter-gatherer forebears to survive for 2-4 million years.) However, the purpose of Science of Ethics is to make clear the ways to fulfill these propensities so as to support the maintenance and development of the species.
A path which has purposes that nurture self and others will come closer to helping one achieve a sustainable belief that their life has meaning because every goal when reached lays the foundation for achieving long term satisfaction rather than only immediate gratification followed by pain for self or others. Instead of doing things haphazardly which may be undoing the acts of others or cutting off future benefits, we are working in an integrated manner which is normally the most efficient, effective way to achieve goals.
[p. 2]
There are many things in life which bring pleasure if they occur surrounded by the proper conditions. The former is true of shared time with friends, stimulating discussion, enlightening literature and plays, good music, delicious/nutritious food, nurturing sex with a loving person, etc. Mere gratification, however, does not necessarily contribute to a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. Short sighted goals may be accompanied by too many unpleasant results, such as a stomach-ache from eating too much candy, lung cancer from smoking cigarettes, maintaining low self-esteem by engaging in sado-masochistic activities, losing friends because of childish behavior, etc. Wealth, power, beauty, physical strength all have their value, but do not by themselves give one a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. Each act or condition must take into account all its obvious implications so the act will give not only momentary pleasure, but lasting good feelings as well. This is an important part of a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. Also, a thing may be painful or unpleasant in some ways, but satisfying enough in other ways to offset this. An example of such an event is setting a track record in the mile race. Every step may bring almost unendurable physical pain, yet, the satisfaction brought by breaking the record, or just being part of the race, may compensate a hundred times over.
EMOTIONS AND A SUSTAINABLE BELIEF THAT ONE'S LIFE HAS MEANING It seems to me that a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning must include all the emotions as they are appropriate. Since emotions as experienced depend on one's beliefs, in order to have healthy emotions, one must have healthy beliefs. Take worry as an example. Sometimes individuals spend hours in pain because they believe that worrying about a problem is helpful or necessary. Once they realize that worry is not only painful, it is debilitating, they than can recognize that the goal is to do whatever one can to solve the problem and then face whatever happens with peace of mind and tranquility. So worry becomes a signal that one needs to focus on their beliefs and work to get them in a better state. Intense guilt and shame are similar examples.No act over which one has control should knowingly prevent others from achieving a sustainable belief that their life has meaning. If individuals can determine that their actions will prevent others from achieving a sustainable belief that their life has meaning, they must alter their actions to avoid doing so, or take parallel action which will prevent their act from doing so. We cannot kill, punish, or harm other individuals -- at least in the absence of unique, unpredictable circumstances.
When a society supports actions with irreversible negative effects on individuals this must prevent members of the society from achieving a sustainable belief that their life has meaning. Until all people are secure, no person is secure. No one is immune from the acts of others and until each person is an Enlightened Person, one is at the mercy of persons too much in pain to avoid violence, too confused to make wise decisions, too insensitive to be counted on.
There are many factors in a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. Some of these factors must be unique to each individual. However, in spite of the unique components of a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning, I believe the primary elements are universal and apply to all human beings.
"One requirement for a happy life and satisfying society is the avoidance of acts which are known to be harmful and utilization of techniques found to bring desirable results." [37]
Although the foregoing appears obvious and is something most thoughtful people would agree with, close scrutiny will point out an interesting problem: We currently know very little about which "acts" (life patterns/behaviors) interfere with happiness and satisfaction, and which ones promote it. Part of the explanation for the foregoing is that the old ideas which taught that God provided all the answers have lost their power, but new answers have yet to be recognized and accepted. No one is focusing on this issue in a coordinated way. Even the fields of psychology are only peripherally involved in this matter. Yet, overcoming this ignorance seems to me to be one of the most pressing needs now facing humanity. An organized approach is essential because a single person's efforts, life experiences, and knowledge are too limited to spark the necessary social changes. In addition, the data is too confusing for any individual to put it all together perfectly by themself. The foregoing is a serious problem with my current formulation of a Science of Ethics.
[p. 3]
Restating the above issue of the requirement for a happy life in my own terms: I would say, We need to clarify what the beliefs are that provide a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning.
Victor Frankl tackled the issue of meaning of life by developing logotherapy. But he failed to realize that meaning of life has many components not just one, has an essential social dimension, and that its primary components are universal requirements needed by everyone. He focused instead on the transforming effect some experiences can have. (For more about Frankl's approach see VOLUME II, Chapter 11, ""Victor Frankl and the Meaning of Life," [38] or read him directly. [39]) Because of the foregoing he took the view that meaning of life somehow comes from outside the individual and that it is unique for each person. He thought in terms of specific events rather than universal categories. Therefore, he thought of meaning of human life as exclusive to the person who experiences it. However, it does not seem to me that Frankl's approach gets us very far. I think, it is critical to realize that "meaning of human life": 1). has many components not just one. 2). depends on common human characteristics shared by all people. 3). has an essential social dimension that requires support from one's community.
The foregoing description provides the basis for an empirical science. A feeling that one's life has meaning undoubtedly has elements unique to a particular person. Also, it is irreparably tied into one's raw "tribal" propensities. My study of humanity convinces me that there is a core of common attributes shared by all people; i.e., their human nature. I believe that one's society plays a key role in providing a feeling that one's life has meaning. This depends on the beliefs taught by the society and the way the society is organized. My approach not only gives us a way to examine the things that provide a feeling that human life has meaning, it also gives us a way of judging societies based on how well their citizens achieve a sustainable belief that their life has meaning.
It is my belief that a persons' feeling that their life has meaning, is sustainable to the degree that they are living congruent with the best of what it means to be a human being. However, this approach contains a two-pronged dilemma. First, what is the best of what it means to be a human being? Second, how do we achieve the foregoing condition?
As for being the best human being it is possible for us to be, I think this has a theoretical dimension that lies at the core of the problem. This is the idea that humanity is in the process of inventing itself and has been since the evolution of the language ability. As indicated elsewhere this means re-interpreting certain elements of our genetic heritage -- our raw "tribal" propensities -- that can divert us from becoming our best self. It is now possible to understand how to realize our full positive potential; i.e., our "wisdom" potential. I propose that humanity is now capable of developing Enlightened Persons and Enlightened Communities. This is as good as it gets. This is utopia!
Achieving this condition is the core problem for Science of Ethics. It is a process that must be determined empirically by gathering data. That method involves honest collection, correlation, and interpretation of facts obtained by actual study of individual people's lives. An extension of the methods of questioning and statistical analysis used by Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey and his group at the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University should be valuable for the actual gathering of some of these facts. This technique might be combined with the knowledge gained from psychotherapy, psychological research, and other data gathering methods to allow real progress in understanding human beings and determining the parameters of a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. Also, Dr. John Gottman's approach described in his book, WHY MARRIAGES FAIL OR SUCCEED, [40] would seem to be especially valuable.
[p. 4]
First, study of individuals' lives provides data that permits the researcher to determine the individual's beliefs, whether implicitly or explicitly held, that relate to their experiencing a feeling that their life has meaning. Then it would allow the researcher to determine how closely the person had lived according to her or his beliefs, how successful this has been in providing the feeling that their life has meaning, and lastly whether the foregoing has universal significance. Since we are dealing with millions of variables obviously we should not expect to come up with simple "yes," "no" answers. Rather we would be working from fuzzy logic grids.
We rarely would have double blind experiments with one variable different in the control and test group in any meaningful way; therefore, conclusions would be less sure. Nevertheless, there are many other ways to test multi-causal phenomena. One example is use of propensity scores. [41]
At best we come up with probabilities, with clusters of behaviors, with ranges that interconnect with other behavior in complex ways. But, all these problems do not mean that we cannot draw useful conclusions from such studies. It merely means that conclusions are open to change and may be altered in important ways with more information just like the rest of science.
This information would need to be gathered from all age groups to determine how needs and values change with age. This data should be collected from all social groupings in order to determine the effects of social factors. These studies must include all societies in order to determine the importance of variation in the factors. These projects would be used to search for the ideas or behaviors that cut people off from achieving their full positive potential, as well as those that encourage individuals to steadily mature and develop throughout their life.
a. Below are the Ways of Wisdom judged necessary to achieve a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. These are working assumptions -- open to revision, clarification, or replacement with updated information. Each of these Ways is discussed in detail later. The Ways of Wisdom have value to the degree that they are useful to individuals and as a starting point for experimentation, organization, discussion, and testing.
1. Recognize that human beings are the ultimate reference system.
2. Endeavor to maintain and develop the human species. Support efforts to develop Enlightened Communities.
3. Seek to understand. Pursue Wisdom.
4. Recognize that all knowledge rests on faith/beliefs and must always be open to questioning.
5. Strive to make the best choices possible.
6. Know and struggle to improve yourself; work to be physically and psychologically healthy.
7. Develop and adopt a perceptual framework in which pain does not prevent the achievement of a sustainable belief that your life has meaning.
8. Help and be helped by other people.
9. Work to increase knowledge and all creative and artistic endeavors. Adopt an inspiring life goal.
10. Support efforts to ensure that every child is provided a loving, nurturing environment and all the things necessary to become an Enlightened Person.
11. Make of your life a spiritual quest. Work to become an Enlightened Person.
[p. 5]
b. The Ways of Wisdom express the things that, I believe, would collectively be able to help anyone achieve a sustainable belief that their life has meaning. However, anything that is listed must be supported by evidence or it is merely conjecture. We can only discover what will bring a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning by research and study. Armchair speculation may be useful in pointing out directions to search, but it is not proof in any way. There is no justification for accepting these conjectures if they sound wrong or are unacceptable for other reasons. All this writing is in one sense a blueprint and can be given no more credence then current evidence supports. As indicated below there will probably be changes in how the Ways of Wisdom inter-relate as a person matures. Some things that at one time seemed very important will at a later time appear less important and vice versa. But, the sustained belief that one's life has meaning must remain as constant as our ability to develop, and this -- like science -- requires a continuing series of paradigm shifts over one's life and over the generations.
One person who has thought about the changes that accompany growing up is Dr. David Norton. He writes about "The Stages of Life: Childhood, Adolescence, Maturation, Old Age." [42] He believes that, "It is no mere coincidence that the world's two great self-actualization doctrines, the Greek and the Hindu, share the thesis that personal growth proceeds by incommensurable stages ...." (p. 172) I don't believe in incommensurable stages (movement from one stage to the next with no intermediate positions). However, Norton's ideas provide some thought-provoking things to consider.
Also, Norton's characterization of Hinduism and Greek religions as incorporating self-actualization doctrines raises some interesting questions. Obviously, a Science of Ethics is totally focused on self-actualization. Exploring where the Greeks and Hindu's went wrong could be valuable to Science of Ethics. VOLUME II, Chapter 24, "What We Can Learn from Studying Folk Religions," [43] is presented as a start in this process.
Norton defines Childhood "as essential dependence."(p. 172)
For Adolescence Norton says it, "...begins in the discovery of autonomy -- 'I am alive; I am an authentic living being, not a derivation. From this moment forward it is I myself who must do my living; no longer is there any other who can do my living for me.' The implications of this recognition are revolutionary, transforming not merely the individual but the entire world. By this single recognition the world of childhood is exchanged for the world of adolescence."(p. 179) Helping this step to be successful is a core challenge of Science of Ethics. In my mind these characteristics appear as though they might help expand what I describe as the "tribal" propensities related to the changes during adolescence.
Norton discusses Maturation, "...whose definitive moral quality derives from its intrinsic obligation upon each individual to 'Become what you are.'"(p. 188) Although this initially sounds good, as indicated below in my mind it ends up being wrong.
Per Norton, Old Age, "...is the stage that has no future....it cannot 'look forward to life,' it cannot 'live by hope.'"(p. 204) In my mind an Enlightened Community would not lead to this state. Even at the moment of death, one would recognize their connection with humanity and its unfolding potential.
Norton's above ideas are not compatible with my own thinking about a sustainable belief that one's life has meaning. But exploring his ideas in more depth may be of great value. For example thinking of Maturation (mature adulthood) as relating to "becoming what you are," seems inherently wrong to me. In reality each person is a vast reservoir of potentials. Which of these potentials are developed and to what degree depends on the time and society in which they grow up. The goal of Science of Ethics is to help the person develop those potentials that move them toward becoming an Enlightened Person and avoiding those potentials that would stand in the way of becoming their best self -- not merely the amorphous "what you are."
[p. 6]
Many times the correct choices are not self evident to an individual, or to a community. But an Enlightened Community must organize its resources so as to do the best it can considering the time in which it exists. It must act so as to help each person make the best choices. And as indicated before when one is able to correct errors as they are recognized, the path of error becomes the path of truth -- the path toward becoming and remaining an Enlightened Person.
.
.
.