Liberating ethics

A great site

The Basic Premise of Ethics.

The two worldviews.

There are two fundamental worldviews by which people discuss ethics. These are theism and atheism. There are also the positions of the agnostic who claims that until they have evidence they can never really know if god exists or not and the evidence they want is sensory and /or reason. The ignostics maintains that it is never possible to know if God exists or not. They are also seeking evidence by sensory means or through reason. Knowing is a stumbling block! There are different types of knowing and people do not all agree on what is knowledge and what is not. The atheists, agnostics and ignostics all seek intellectual knowing, which is gained through the agency of the ego-self. The theists all have, in different degrees, an awareness of some “deeper” level of knowing. This is beyond the intellect and hence outside of reason and logic. We call this type of knowing “faith based”. Ultimately the source of “deeper” knowledge is the mystical experience. It is being criticized, by atheists especially, as subjective, imaginary or self delusional etc., but all of these suggestions are false. The experience is not describable but it is possible to say some things about it. First it is not subjective or imaginary or self delusional as is claimed for the very simple reason that the ego self is not present. In fact the no self experience is the open gateway to mystical experience. Secondly it is an experience of a whole different level of existence, outside of the universes and yet not excluding them. It sounds nonsensical to the intellect. Most theists are only aware of a “deeper” knowing and have not realized their mystical experience as it has been too fleeting. Many people seek to validate their “deeper” knowing or faith through the holy texts. They seek to find them historically accurate and consider their literary styles etc in order to confirm their faith. To overcome all these problems of knowing and not knowing God, as a way of considering a person worldview, it is better to look at how people view reality first.

There are two basic ways in which people view reality. One way is to consider that reality is only physical. They say that the material is all that there is because they seek knowledge through sensory experience or logic and reason. Most scientists fall into this category. The other view of reality considers both a physical and a metaphysical (or non-physical) aspect. It is actually a totality of mental (non-physical) and material (physical) AND spiritual. I will call the two worldviews as separatist and holistic. These need some explaining first before I use them in my discussion of ethics.

The material only reality can be called a separatist worldview because every element within this reality is fundamentally unrelated to all others so individual but fundamentally separate from all others. This is the atheistic, agnostic and ignostic worldview. The material / non-material reality can be called a holistic worldview because every element within this reality is fundamentally related to all other elements so individual but fundamentally connected to all others. This is the theists worldview.


In Figure 2b I have drawn the material / non-material as two separate aspects of the one reality, however they are really intimately one. This does not say that “we are all one” as some new age people are claiming. If you look more closely you will find that New Age scientists believe in a material only reality. The “we are all one” that they talk about is a matter-energy continuum. The non-physical aspect or Mind contains an infinite set of conditions from which selections give rise to physical form. The Mind has two aspects. One is the field of potentiality, which we could describe as void, nothingness or emptiness. The other aspect is familiar, namely the field of manifestation or creation. It is tempting to talk about “Mind and matter” and talk about a duality but there is no real duality. All things are essentially empty.

The two worldview with respect to people’s view of reality.

The separatist /materialist’s view is necessarily a collection of independent parts that are fundamentally unrelated and only become related where there is interaction. Two or more elements of matter, whether inanimate (from fundamental particles to stars) or animate (plants, animals and humans) have to be brought together or come together to interact and form relationship. From this point of view, the whole is an assembly of parts, an aggregate. Thoughts and actions of everyone in a separatist’s universe is essentially unconnected. They treat thoughts as circuitry in the brain or arise as a result of the activity of the brain so mental information or thoughts cannot be perceived by anyone else. Phenomena like psi and ESP are not possible.

People of the separatist worldview do not consider that they bear any responsibility outside of whatever responsibility they choose to exercise. And this mostly involves those with whom they are related. Choosing to be responsible means responsibility is based on personal bias, ie subjective.

Diametrically opposed to this is the holistic position. Here “The Mind” (or “The Mind of God”) underpins everything in existence, thus brings every aspect of the universe into relationship. Through the mental level all elements in the field of manifestation are aware of each other. This point is most commonly accepted by shamans. Most others accept that only sentient living beings may be or are aware of each other. Shared ideas are possible, hence phenomena like psi and ESP are possible and real. So while brain activity may be used to describe thoughts, those thoughts are mental perception (ESP) rather than the result of sensory perception.

People of a holistic worldview see themselves related to all others and everything in existence. Being connected to all others they are both individual and interdependent. They have close relationships with particular others but they are fundamentally related to all others so they bear responsibility to all others for all of their actions. Being responsible is necessary both for the wellbeing of the individual and the collective. Where self and other are interconnected there is no choice. You cannot act responsibly for yourself and your loved ones without acting responsibly for the collective. Choosing to be irresponsible is still possible but it is a violation that carries consequences owing to the interdependence of all elements. Responsibility is not based on personal bias and opinions, ie it is not subjective. Our responsibility, how we act both to ourselves and all others is objective.

Relationship is key to ethics. So we need to appreciate the dynamics of relationship within these two worldviews to appreciate ethics. In the next post I will discus relationship with respect to the two worldviews.


Liberating Ethics


In this book I want to discuss ethics as natural laws, just as the laws of physics are natural laws. And I specifically see this as true only with God, the creator of this and all other universes, being in the picture. It is impossible, from my understanding to discuss ethics without invoking God and the creation as God’s creation. I do not see God as a personal being but something unknown and unknowable by our limited human intellect. However I also consider that it is necessary for most people, in order to develop a relationship with God, to worship God in some personal form if they desire to do so, Jesus, Krishna etc.  

The questions of Atheists, as to who or what is God and prove that God exists is not one that I will try to answer here and I don’t think these questions are even relevant to this discussion. However the subject of ethics throws light on, if not constitutes evidence for the existence of God. The subject of ethics also points strongly to a non-physical reality that we can call The Mind, The One Mind or The Mind of God. This is the universal platform, on which and through which we all participate and interact. Relationship is meaningless without this connectivity through the Mind of God. For without it we are like mechanical robots and nothing more. However it is even more than that because the physical cannot truly be explained without this non-physical realm. When we look closely at matter, we find ideas and relationships are the core issues.

Ethics can be seen more clearly when we consider that there are only two basic world views and they cannot both be right. One is that of materialism, the “this is all that there is” viewpoint that is favored by many scientists (who are predominantly atheists) and others. The other is one that takes in the mental or non-physical realm as well as the physical realm. These two worldviews play a key role in people’s lives when it comes to ethics and the quality of an ethical code that is followed. We can see enough evidence coming through basic science that the “materialism is not all that there is” viewpoint is not valid, even though the majority of scientists accept it. They say that nothingness is full of energy but the nothingness that they are quoting is at the threshold of physicality. There is far more than this. Furthermore materialism alone as the be all and end all does not provide a basis for the interconnectedness of people and indeed of all life on earth nor does it explain some scientific phenomena such as non-locality and the horizon problem.

The viewpoint, which recognizes the existence of a non-physical realm, is the only one that provides the basis for interconnectedness and thus relationship and life as we experience it on this plane. We are all in a fundamental relationship with each other and indeed with every form of life and even with every inanimate object in the universe. That relationship is due to our interconnectedness, our participation that comes about in The Mind, the common platform. We can go further than that because everyone is in a one to one relationship with God and thus through God we are all interconnected, from giant stars down to the subatomic particle. Every aspect of the universe is to some extent relationally entangled with every other. However when two are brought into a closer relationship, whether they are humans, animals or even subatomic particles, there is clear evidence of their entanglements since the one has knowledge of the conditions of the other. In my opinion this is why ethics are depicted as religious laws and as the “Will of God” and why an ethical code is recognized by all religions. True religions are not outside of politics and people can be found at various times in all religions who try to push a distorted brand of ethics that favors some group. However if we look at the essence of religion we find it is ethically based. 

God is beyond our understanding as human beings (with the investigating agent being the personal or ego self ) because God is outside of the system and we, in the human garb, are elements within the system. However we can still discuss the laws of ethics within our understanding and especially that, that stems out of mystical or enlightenment experience. I don’t think we need to consider the nature of our connectedness with God in order to say sufficient about the validity of ethics, but only that it is so. I will make my comments about the higher level, which relates to the nature of our relationship with God, to the best of my understanding, towards the end of this book.

The all important question is can ethics stand as universal laws? And furthermore not as laws that are imposed on people under pain of punishment or death but laws that appeal to them universally in a pluralistic society because they are beneficial? Indeed ethics is the foundation of health. I believe that both these questions can be answered with resounding affirmatives BUT only for those people who are humane. Humane people naturally seek the benefit not only of themselves personally but also and equally for others so also for the collective. For such as situation to exist, i.e., where ethics are freely observed there is no place for the inhumane or evil people. So what about those that are inhumane? This brings in the question of good and evil. A lot of people who attack religion and God say that as there is evil in the world then there cannot be a benevolent God or alternatively if God exists the God is not benevolent. A part of this problem lies in how God is perceived, especially in relation to religions such as Christianity who talk about a personal God or “living” God. It is impossible not to attribute anthropomorphic qualities to such a God or consider God as a him or her and as is fashionable these days to some sort of superior alien life. The question of evil does not bring in the question of God’s existence, nor of the qualities of God. And that is appreciated when the nature of evil is understood. Some people believe that there is some independent spiritual being that is malevolent and which stands in opposition to God. This was pushed in Christianity, particularly in times where dominance over Pagans was sought. There is no such being. The ideas of a devil who is a spiritually independent being, with spiritual powers and in opposition to God is a fantasy. There is however a spiritually dependent “evil mindset”, which appears as a spiritual being but it is a illusion. The evil mindset or seeming evil spirit is dependent upon living, evil people. They form a collective of a single evil mindset. The Gnostics in the early Christian church recognized this but they were opposed by corrupt clergy. The position taken by Christian in discrediting the Gnostics was that Gnostics associated evil with the material world and that all material existence was evil. This is not what they were about. It may be that there were corrupt people amongst the Gnostic. It wouldn’t be surprising as they look to get into every area of human life to corrupt and distort. The Gnostics in their stance were pointing to what evil really is and that would have certainly upset evil people looking to hide in to manipulate people’s thinking from the areas such as religions and politics.  Human beings, who are evil have an evil or corrupted mind, a criminal mind. They network and work together but not visibly. While living these people together exert a mental malevolent influence through the use of ideas but they have no support structure or ally in the spiritual realm. They are easily combated and knowledge is the key.

 It needs to be appreciated that there is no possible way that evil people can be accommodated in society. Put bluntly, evil people have no right to live in communities and no right to life. It sounds harsh but you only need to look at the damage they do to see that this is a reasonable stance. As societies around the world we remove criminals from society and either kill them (capital punishment) or quarantine them in jails. But we are only removing those that are visible, the tip of the iceberg. The bulk so far have carried on harming people in the hundreds of millions every year around the globe. The damage is being labelled disease and traded for profit. In the last 100 years human societies have gone from seeing disease in about 10 to 20% of the population to 50% of the population and every year we see steep increases and medicos project horror figures for the future. What humane people need to understand is that we are in the midst of war, a war that is more sinister that any that have ever been fought before on Earth.

 Winning the war is easier than anyone might think. Surely we cannot line up all the evil people and shoot them because the avenue is not available. One of the reasons is that we would need to identify them and they are highly deceptive. Some of them stand as seeming pillars of society! The other main reason is that if we did embark on such a journey the evil people would quickly seize power by posing as good guys. They would quietly begin destroying humane people as supposedly evil. The road though is a lot easier than either of these two scenarios. The awakening of humane people as to the methods of foul play and thus the true nature of what doctor’s are calling disease, means the humane people will become strong and be able to stand against the evil people. Secondly humane people will begin to realize the enormous power that they hold in the mind. At present they are disabled and have no conception of what power they have. The evil people are best attacked in the mental realm. So without the ability to get power and pleasure from hurting other around them, and with an onslaught in the mental realm, evil people perish. They will die in their millions, requiring to be ploughed under in mass graves. And of course this will means the humane people will be the only ones left standing. They will not get sick anymore. There will be no cancer, no heart disease, no diabetes no matter what you eat, no strokes and no mental disorders and that is only to name to main ones. So the knock-on effect is that the medical industry as it stands today will collapse. There may still be the odd doctor around but they will be few and far between. Almost everyone will live their lives not know what a doctor looks like!

 In this book I will discuss the ground, upon which ethics stands, the benefits of ethics, which includes health, their importance in religion and spiritual practice and the great importance of ethics in human society and human interactions. I will also discuss the question of evil.

 Next, in the first chapter, I will discuss the basic premise of Ethics.


My blogs

What is disease really about?

What’s behind disease?     

Liberating ethics                  

My painting blog                   

Cooking by Feel                     

My photography blog          

Post Navigation