I believe the objectivity of ethics can and needs to be proven through global statistical análysis.

I recently had the pleasure of meeting a member of the Amherst Philosophy department. I forget his name, but I remember he told me he his latest course was on one question: ¿Are Ethics Objective?

I was immediately compelled to say that they where, but ironically I could not offer support, and stopped myself, after trying to. The question echoed with my own intuition. Many years of pondering, and observing something I can't put words too. I felt it was important for me to share some ideas about this. Maybe learn something.

I would like to say: I think that the principle of ethics is objective, and I would like to prove this. If this is proven, it should be the most important educational course in global public education. I feel it is important to do so.

I have a hypothesis: The principle of ethics is an objective abstraction of reality, and humans are universally born within a state of balance that is congruent with this principle and we are conscious of it. It is by having the freedom to act in congruence of this this intuition, that we are happy. I think that the scientific proof of the principle of ethics is necessary for humans to use their freedom responsibly.

I think that through scientific procesing of this hipothesis, using global statistics, will give us enough proof to declare is a universal scientific principle.


I by no means think that this logic is complete. I think we need to dicern scientific truth from culture. And intuitive truth from religious paradigm. But I think this natural wisdom is about as real as the abstraction of the concept of gravity.


I wonder what you think of this and offer some supporting ideas below. If one can prove the scientific valitity of ethics, will I be adding to the evolution and preservation of mand kind?

Sincerely,

Aguitta




Bellow is something close ot a personal brain storm. I have decided not to try to resolve my earlier question today, or even in my life span. It is frustrating and unfair to myself try to try to resolve it by myself. But here go some ideas and opinions:

• It could be an instinct we have kept because that is how we have survived as a species or not, we don't know why gravity is, we know it is. And by proving this, we have the basis to demand it to be the key course in global public education. How would the world change if we understood the value of ethics, not subjective, not a theory. But a scientific fact?.
• I would like to contribute to the creative collective of people who pursue the establishment of a scientific principle that can re-shape our future, in the same way other scientific breakthroughs have changed our world. I believe that this specific scientific endeavor is dearly needed in a time where people are becoming more and more self-guided and have more and more choices, and humanity has more and more power, through science, of the system we live in.
• I believe that this does not pose a conflict of faith vs. science but that it happily resolves a long debate. We need to assure we have the freedom to act accordingly, and that means we have to respect and defend the individuals freedom 100%. This is huge, but needs to be processed with great responsibility. It is perhaps the most serious of things, today.
• I truly believe that there is no better use of my time than to dedicate it to the pursue of scientific processing of this hypothesis, for I believe in it. But can the principle of ethics be also a scientific principle?
• An ethical principle defines what is "good" and what is "bad" in human behavior. Comprehention of Ethics allows us to ensure our actions are "Good" or understand why they are "Bad". We can only truly be accountable and control the balance of our own actions. We are a species that survives by interdependence. We are all elements of a system. In the sense that we are elements in a system, good or bad is defined more in terms of the equilibrium between order vs. caos. The universal importance of equilibrium is evident in in economics, psychology, theology, ecology, physics, mathematics, religion, Etc.
• We can only control our own actions. Unethical actions are the cause of great inbalance in the world today. It is the power of science and unbalanced education that has given some more power than others, and this abuse has grown bigger and bigger, in many ways, not just phisical, but emotiona, psychological, cultural, biologocal, ecological, etc.
• It is our actions that add to the collective state of the world. Our actions influence other people and other people influence our actions. It is in our choices and behaviors that we truly are free to act as we see fit.
• It is in the security of our own freedom that we act most justly.
• It is in the absence of the principle of ethics, that caos and confusion permit the abuse of individuals freedoms by other individuals. It is the lack of freedom to pursue ones happiness, that disables an individuals of a sense of direction and a sense of being. It is the absence of the freedom to do what one thinks is just, that one finds himself unsatisfied with some of his actions, blaming the "System" and excusing his actions; "I have to do this, because If I don't, some one else will...X"
• Some commit the error of violating other peoples freedoms, because they believe they need to do what is right for others. Some people act against their own freedom, because they have been taught that they don't have freedom. All act becasue they dont believe in the concretness of pure ethics, but rely on other facts of their own experience.
• This starts a chain reaction. Terrorism and intra-family violence are just some of many examples.
• It is the absence of the security in the "Absolute" and "Concreteness" of the principle of ethics that permits people to act as they do.
• They do not believe others have this freedom. We dare not act only on what we believe is right 100%, in the same way sailors before the 1500's did not dare think the world was round and sail either east or west. Do we go totaly selfish or do we go totally collective?.
• It is in the observations of history and anthropology that one can perceive a direct correlation between people being free and happy or the vice versa.
• Proof of ethics exists in the It is in the statistical obcervation of the human condition. Of a individuals ability to adapt to his or her environment and the rise of psychopathology demographics indicating that people are not happy knowing the state of caos and hardship the world is in right now. It is in the scientific obcervation of human´s ethical behavior that we see intuitive results.
  
  I know that the world is in grave danger, and I this is due to imbalance. We just don't give enough credit to ourselves and act acording to our intuition. Defending our choice by trying to explain the imposibility of fast, global, 100% positive change, that we continue to support the present dynamics that guide the human system of interdependence into caos. (We are collectivly contributing to the imbalance of the ecosystem, social system, etc. We know where we are heading, we just dont want to believe it, we know the solution, we just don't believe it) We are in collective denile, and thus we need to provide methodic confrontation of the validity of ethics. We need scientific proof of ethics.
• Scientific proof - Verifiable proof - of the principle of ethics can change the world, in our lifespan. The world can be changed FAST. The way Youtube has. The way Google Has. The way knlowlidge of swine flu or mortgage bubble has.
• We need overcome our own frustrations in this endeavor, and have faith in our intuition - and proove it through scientific observation. But no to validate a religion, to validate our own inner wisdom. And to give people freedom to pursue it resposibly.
• I think that the principle is " I love me + I love others = Happyness".
  
• I think that the princple is " My fredom ends where your freedom begins"
  
• The USA has something promising about it self, in relation to the rest of the world, because of its founding principles, (That are not considered scientific) the freedom to pursue happiness.
• Is there proof that the sense of ethics in a comunity are directly proportional to the comunities happines. (Not sporadic joy, but a balance within the individual, of what he can control, a balance between good and evil, or caos and equilibrium) A balance of freedom and responsibility. A deeper faith in ones own intuition.
• My hypothesis relies in the proof that can be collected in the scientific obcervation of our system of existence. We are in a sense billions of blind men, all giving testimony of what they can percieve. It is time to gather all of these testimonies and declare what is common to all. One video on youtube would be enough.
• We must first prove the validity of ethics in a systme influenced by humans, then communicate it, and let other people proove it in their lives. It is our ethical responsibility to prove this before offer testament of it. We have to believe it and act accordingly.

As you can see I need help thinking.

Thank you again for your time.