I have spent most of my life trying to make good decisions. Like many others, I've failed at least half of the time. We could cite many reasons for that, perhaps boredom, inability to accept my own mistakes, excessive alcohol use, or intellectual arrogance. None of those things really come close to the point though. Those things are a part of me, some are a work-in-progress, and others you'll just have to deal with if you want to interact with me. The real problem isn't any of these personal failings, it's that I never accepted any moral code, legal or religious as being relevant to my life. This has been misconstrued as a failure to accept authority. In fact it's because those who claim the authority operate in irrelevant systems built on shadows and are not contested nearly as much as they should be.
Here in the United States of America, we claim that the guiding moral code for our society is based in a staunch belief in human rights. We still talk about the inalienable rights in this "one nation under God" of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Our lawmakers certainly don't make decisions in line with that credo, making it highly irrelevant. The previous regime referred to God, King, and Country as a list of priorities. Seriously? That's quite antiquated and the rules of the United Kingdom certainly don't follow that anymore. Good for them; they shouldn't. I have heard Christians of various denominations talk about another potential set of priorities: God, Spouse, Children. There are three things wrong with all of these sets of priorities. There is an implication that a higher power has defined these rules and priorities, the focus is external, and they define differences between individuals.
Claiming the existence or knowledge of a guiding force that defines a moral code, allows an individual or an establishment to be autocratic regardless of any pretend systems beneath that. This God removes personal accountability and gives a broad range actions validity in the minds of those who subscribe to such ways of thinking. Religions have in the name of one God or another completed some of the most horrific acts in history in the name of their God, although they have done many good things too. This continues to be a problem. It's not only major monotheistic religions that are made irrelevant by abstracting their values into thin air and then giving that air power in order to alleviate personal accountability, yet I do not retract my directed point. Modern humanity has no place for such infantile systems as an abstraction given moral authority. It stands directly in the way of improvement, both personal and communal.
Moral codes tend to be focused outside of the individual, and sometimes at the expense of the individual attempting to follow the code. The Beatitudes are an example of a system focusing on others. They are a good list of nice things to do for others, but the problem comes when we push such things to a limit and glorify lack and suffering as virtues. External focus of moral systems then can lead to purposeful and valued self sacrifice. I have no idea how such systems were ever developed. It's counter-intuitive and not very helpful. We as humans experience life from one perspective for it's entirety, from the inside out. In effect, we are each the center of our own universes. Any moral code must be founded on that knowledge and grown from there.
As individuals, we are part of a larger collection. Unfortunately, we have been taught for our entire lives to break that up, and our codes of conduct are founded on the ideas of segregation (not always institutionalized). We are bombarded with ways of looking at others as being different in some way. I am a Caucasian, Male, American. That's complete nonsense. Once upon a time, geography made a gigantic difference and the concept of foreign and dangerous made sense. This world we live in is different. The barriers of contact are gone. Communication and transportation make nearly anywhere in the world accessible to us. We need to stop attempting to define ourselves as part of a limited group with what are becoming more and more arbitrary methods of classification. Religions that have exclusive natures need to open up and stop making names for those who are not included. Nationalism is more dangerous than it is helpful. Perhaps it's the next great thing we need to conquer. Our moral codes must stop setting boundaries when pertaining to how our actions affect others. This segregation and the imaginary existence of enemies within our own species has to be broken down. One day, we might find there really is an enemy. We can't afford to invent them from within.
Seeing these problems and pointing them out doesn't do a whole lot of good, and certainly doesn't solve my problem of needing a relevant moral code for a modern world. As a result, I have come to the decision that I need to build a new moral code, based on what I call Inclusive Egocentricity. The old ways of divinely constructed We vs Other need to be replaced with a down-to-earth understanding of Me and Us. This blog will be my ongoing thoughts on how social morality can evolve in a beneficial way using both models and case studies that are current and relevant.
