Demystifying Objective Morality
Is there such a thing as objective morality? And if so, how does one discern it?
In my view, Objectively moral behavior refers to actions taken by an individual which are in harmony with the environmental context in such a way that preserves or repairs the natural rate of evolution of the majority of all related and affected systems.
To expound on that condensed definition, what i am trying to say is that from what we know about the universe, when looked at as a singular entity, it appears to be evolving by itself and at a stable (though variable) rate.
you can quantitatively measure this evolution in terms of information, complexity and energy. Information theory is a great way to quantify how systems evolve, and if you could find a way to isolate or simulate a society, you could provide to that society different moral values and laws, and given that there is sufficient experimental controls in place to give scientifically valid results, you could empirically measure how different laws and moral values affect the evolution of a societal system.
following on from this observation, living an objectively moral existence would presumably involve living in such a way where the individual behaves in such a way that preserves the natural rate of evolution of his surroundings.
Obviously everyone has an intuition that doing good, helping people, and in general doing what you can do in order to make the world a better place is a moral thing to do, but this is where people also get tripped up and confused, as sometimes trying to help someone can actually hurt them.
It requires a delicate, intricate balance to understand when help in a particular situation is needed, or when the agents in the situation need to be left to their own devices so that they can develop the skills and strategies required for dealing with a particular situation.
likewise, sometimes actions that seem to be immoral when viewed in isolation, such as killing someone, actually become in accordance with the theory of objective morality when viewed in a specific context. e.g: a hostage situation where pacifying the captors instead of killing them is either not an option or the far riskier option.
an example of forcing a pace of evolution which is too quick and out of alignment with the natural pace, is eugenics. While the idea behind it might make logical sense when perceived with a limited mindset and information, anyone with a heart can see that, as well as having many other negative side effects, it actually causes a large amount of resistance,unhappiness and trauma which propagate outwards and cause all sorts of unwanted “vibrational” effects (informational, emotional, energetic, etc) which in the end actually end up hurting the overall evolution of that society in the long run.
What can be observed in the macrocosm of society can also be observed in the microcosm of the individual. How we treat ourselves must also be in accordance with our own natural rate of evolution. It is human nature to evolve, no doubt. But the true art of self development lies not in “forcing” oneself to evolve as quickly as possible, but in discerning and maintaining the naturally optimal rate of evolution for that individual.
Without some level of irony, this is in fact the easiest way to evolve as well as the quickest, and this is due to it’s accordance with objective moral law and the energetic optimization which arises from living a life finely attuned to all surrounding internal and external systems.
As a summary, I’d like to conclude this article with a quote from the Tao Te Ching. As in it’s timeless wisdom it says far more in a single line than i could ever hope to say in a million.
“A leader is best
When people barely know he exists
Of a good leader, who talks little,
When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,
They will say, “We did this ourselves.”— Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
Thanks for reading, If you liked the article, check me out on instagram! — https://www.instagram.com/mikeyjesney/
