Ethics: Difference between revisions
Fractalguy (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Fractalguy (talk | contribs) (Conviction) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The reason for [[Utilitarianism]] is that it is the only ethical system that is potentially subject to [[scientific]] inquiry, as long as ''good'' can be quantified objectively. Since [[evolution]] has correlated what is ''good'' for humans with what gives us [[happiness]], if we can measure the [[happiness]] of a population we can tell if what we are doing is ''good'', at least relative to other societies we've been able to study. | The reason for [[Utilitarianism]] is that it is the only ethical system that is potentially subject to [[scientific]] inquiry, as long as ''good'' can be quantified objectively. Since [[evolution]] has correlated what is ''good'' for humans with what gives us [[happiness]], if we can measure the [[happiness]] of a population we can tell if what we are doing is ''good'', at least relative to other societies we've been able to study. | ||
== It's About Conviction == | |||
In [[wikipedia:Robert_Sapolsky|Sapolsky's]] book [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/83817782-determined Determined], there is a chapter devoted to the notion of moral conviction versus indifference, and the research showing that strong moral convictions, regardless of whether they are [[secular]] or [[religious]], correlate to the most prosocial behavior. It is not [[belief]] in [[god]] or [[atheism]] that determines whether you are willing to undermine others to benefit yourself, it is moral indifference. | |||
The chart below shows the difference between conviction and indifference in both [[secular]] and [[spiritual]] contexts. On both sides there are those who lead unexamined lives, by going through the motions of their particular [[religion]] to keep up appearances, or pursuing a shallow, [[materialistic]] [[secular]] [[life]]. | |||
[[File:Morality-conviction-theistic-secular-conviction-indifference.png|none|thumb|650x650px|It's not where your convictions come from, it's that you have them.]] | |||
[[Religious]] people tend to lump all "[[atheists]]" into the bottom-right category, falsely assuming that without [[god]] there can be only [[wikipedia:Nihilism|nihilism]]. They rightly point to the growing number of non-believers who live shallow, [[materialistic]], hedonistic lifestyles that lead more often to [[addiction]] than lasting [[happiness]]. But it isn't [[religion]] that these people truly need, it is conviction! Some may find it in [[religion]], but in modern [[society]] there needs to be a [[Secular institutions|secular institution]] that people can go to deepen and reinforce their convictions without invoking the [[supernatural]]. | |||
== What Are The Rules? == | == What Are The Rules? == | ||
Revision as of 14:22, 6 July 2024
The Ethics of metaculture is based on Utilitarianism, but with some evidence-based solutions to the various problems of utilitarianism that have been raised by critics.
The reason for Utilitarianism is that it is the only ethical system that is potentially subject to scientific inquiry, as long as good can be quantified objectively. Since evolution has correlated what is good for humans with what gives us happiness, if we can measure the happiness of a population we can tell if what we are doing is good, at least relative to other societies we've been able to study.
It's About Conviction
In Sapolsky's book Determined, there is a chapter devoted to the notion of moral conviction versus indifference, and the research showing that strong moral convictions, regardless of whether they are secular or religious, correlate to the most prosocial behavior. It is not belief in god or atheism that determines whether you are willing to undermine others to benefit yourself, it is moral indifference.
The chart below shows the difference between conviction and indifference in both secular and spiritual contexts. On both sides there are those who lead unexamined lives, by going through the motions of their particular religion to keep up appearances, or pursuing a shallow, materialistic secular life.
Religious people tend to lump all "atheists" into the bottom-right category, falsely assuming that without god there can be only nihilism. They rightly point to the growing number of non-believers who live shallow, materialistic, hedonistic lifestyles that lead more often to addiction than lasting happiness. But it isn't religion that these people truly need, it is conviction! Some may find it in religion, but in modern society there needs to be a secular institution that people can go to deepen and reinforce their convictions without invoking the supernatural.
What Are The Rules?
Saying that people should practice utilitarian ethics is easy. Doing the necessary research to determine the best course of action personally as well as in politics and economics is hard. Fortunately there have been many brilliant people throughout history who have worked on this and we can summarize their research into something easy and practical that can be applied in your daily life.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
If you are looking for much more specific recommendations that can help your life choices, see Evidence-Based Best Practices.
If you have recently been quantum leaped into the body of a black person, the following musical provides great advice on the rules for this very specific situation.