ethics for human survival

8/3/2019 Ethics for Human Survival

1/9

Jamiline Marie C. Lebrilla

2007-40741

Ethics for Human Survival

Human beings are obsessed with the idea of right and

wrong, good and evil. And throughout history, they have

created standards by which to judge themselves and their

actions. These standards can be ones own feelings, the

norms of a society, its traditions, religion, or the laws

of a state. For many, these can be taken as their own

moral standard, a set of rules by which societies

proscribe. However, two societies with different beliefs or

moral standards cant both be right. This is why certain

religions like the Muslims and the Christians have created

an omnipotent, omniscient, and all-powerful being called

Allah for the former, and God for the latter, to be

arbiters of good and evil, right and wrong, with absolute

authority.

However, I believe that in the era we live in, we are

gradually moving away from this idea or belief in an

absolute authority, and if you take it away, what you are

left with, are societies with their subjective beliefs

Samuel Huntington claimed that after the Cold War,

wars would no longer be between state versus state, but

culture versus culture. Conflicting traditions, norms, and


2/9

morals would result in cultural clashes. This is already

happening now in our time. In Sudan alone, where they have

Christians, Muslims, and those practicing Sudanese

religions rubbing elbows with each other, tensions are

incredibly high. Even the Cold War was not purely

political, or a grab for power, it was also moral, as the

morals of liberal states in NATO, where incredibly

different from the morals of communist states within the

Warsaw Pact. What can we assume from this, except that a

world where there is not one objective moral standard is

doomed to chaos? The current existence of moral standards

is nothing but a plushy blanket. It has no real leg to

stand on.

Chaos, however, is the reason why morals are

necessary. A moral standard institutes certain rules which

everyone understands, and know they must live by. Such an

understanding makes for a more peaceful society and

increases the survival of the humanity. However, what is

necessary in this day and age, are morals which set the

standard for the whole planet. As long as such a standard

is nonexistent, chaos, or warring, is the default scenario

on Earth.


3/9

Concept of Man

Man is inherently self-interested. His actions are

guided by what he assumes will give him the highest self-

satisfaction. Goals can range from small to large, with

feelings ranging from a small sense of pleasure, to an ever

flowing ecstasy of triumph. He may weigh possible actions

from short-term, to long-term benefit; however, what it

still boils down to is self-satisfaction.

Man is also an irrational being. Though he has a

brain, and the ability to think logically and reasonably,

emotions inevitably get in the way of rational thinking and

lead him to commit foolish mistakes. Therefore, man is

predisposed to be stupid. Because, what else would you call

it if a man already knows the right action to do, but is

inclined to do the opposite?

From this, we can see that man is a foolish being.

This is why, of all sins, the greatest sin of a man is to

allow his irrationality to take control of him. Man must

always try to be rational. Sometimes, this means trying to

appear irrational on the surface, in order to adhere to the

irrationality of a society. Galileo Galilei was killed

because he could not keep his rationality to himself.

Religion is also the most organized industry of

irrationality in the world.


4/9

Ethics

It is hard, however, to always know what a rational or

irrational action is. I submit then, that the only rational

standard is racial survival. This is the prime function of

any society. All societies are based on rules to protect

pregnant women and young children. There is no other

universal morality possible. Attempts to create a perfect

society on any foundation other than women and children

first is automatically genocidal. Against this standard,

survival of the, rational decisions must be made.

I believe in right and wrong, but not good and evil.

History has shown that the separation between these two

concepts is as muddied as a sinkhole. There is never just

black and white, but only grey. However, I do know that

from birth, I have been subconsciously influenced to

subscribe to a certain worldview, with all its attendant

biases and irrationalities. Therefore, there is one moral

standard in one society, which supersedes another, though

they all agree that survival is the end goal.

In trying to dispense all other surplus beliefs, I

submit that one must always make sure to act, without

hurting anyone unnecessarily, in the achievement of

survival. When I say unnecessary, one must look at

necessary hurts. First, you think of it at the level of


5/9

individual risk to your person, if the other is not hurt

necessarily. Next, you must think of it at the level of

family, then of a larger group such as a tribe or a

community, then of your state, then of the human race.

Despite survival of the human race being the endpoint,

realistically, this is how humans think of matters

pertaining to them. Again, self-interest rules, despite the

fact that individually, mans chances for survival

dwindles. This is why collective security between states

is necessary. Are the pains towards individuals or groups

necessary? If a man enjoys hurting anyone unnecessarily,

then it is action without purpose and is irrational.

In actions against others, whether it be preventive or

preemptive defense does not matter. A man is required to

choose an action guaranteed to produce the highest

percentage of success. If you see that defeat is

inevitable, then you must run. It is better to be a live

coward than a dead hero.

With regard to Man in its entirety as the human race,

they are morally required to act in ways which improve the

human race, or heighten its chances for survival as a

whole, must be done. Even human experimentation can be

justified according to this concept. If improvement in

human evolution heightens survival, then it must be done.


6/9

Ideal State

The government is not required to do good, only that

it must refrain from doing evil. Any policy can be seen as

evil or good from any standpoint. A state must only ensure

that it refrains from doing evil as much as possible.

My ideal state would be one which encompasses the

entire planet, and one wherein all people subscribe to only

one set of rules, norms, traditions, or morals. This

ensures that a conflict of understanding would not happen.

In the current status-quo, an organization which has

international membership would be the United Nations. In my

ideal state, the UN would be the world government, with the

Prime (topmost leader), voted on by council members. These

council members are heads of the various sectors in which

Earth has now been divided by. These council members, in

turn, are chosen, not by the vote of the citizens, but

through a system of tests who are composed of several

hundred levels, each level becoming more difficult than the

one before it. Each test is tailor fitted for the purpose

of administration. This would ensure that sector leaders

are actually experts in administration, and not mere

winners due to overabundant amounts of charisma, as is

possible in a voting system.


7/9

In turn, the underlings below these sector leaders are

chosen, according to the tests they have passed. Positions

within this world state are chosen purely by merit. And by

the time they reach sector leader position, they would have

had more than enough practical application. As long as they

perform well, they cannot be replaced. This ensures that

people in government positions will think of more long-term

policies. And since they are no longer dependent upon the

votes of the citizenry, they will not spend their time and

money on projects that cater to these prospective voters.

However, since the politicians are no longer dependent

upon votation, they may not take the choices of the

citizens into account. Which is why, through votation,

citizens in a certain sector are allowed to depose a

politician in that sector as long as the majority have

voted against him.

In order to ensure that citizens do not become to

enamored with their sector, and start constructing an

otherness mindset, which can result in sector to sector

conflict, or war, citizens are required to migrate to

another sector every six years. In this way, there will

emerge a mindset of themselves as global citizenry,

instead of citizens of just one state.


8/9


9/9

irrationality in the world. They make people forget and

become self-destructive. This is because these morals teach

people to have a screwed-up set of priorities. If their

self-interest is controlled by irrational morals, then the

human race is doomed to be constantly in conflict.

ethics for human survival

Documents