I’d really like to read your comments on this new approach to the ethical life.
I am not claiming they are conscious of it, yet today people are hungry ... but they don't know what they are hungry for. However, when they see it, they want it! When they learn about continuous value creation, they know they want it. [Recall that there was no particular market for the ipad before it came out, but once it did, there turned out to be a strong demand for it. I am in what follows suggesting an analogy to this... only in the realm of ideas.]
Some of us want to change the world for the better. We pioneers are looking for people who are early-responders, trend-setters, the first to try a new technology. We praise them for being among those few who are the first to take a look at something new -- in this case, the axiogenic perspective. See http://axiogenics.com/ For once they know how plausible and sensible it is, they begin planting seeds - like a farmer who nourishes an entire village.
I speak of "seeds." These ideas are seeds. They are kindling and sparks that start a big fire. These ideas - these sparks - may lead us to keep asking ourselves the Central Question of Life, and ask others to do the same. [See the recent book, ANSWERING THE CENTRAL QUESTION by Demerest & Schoof, (2011)]. What is the Central Question? It is: How can I create value, here and now? For life is about creating value. . Let's work for this to be the commonsense norm, the prevailing ethos.
Now, today, the commonsense norm is: "Life is all about ME How can I get what I want?" It's a win/lose mentality. It's about ruthless rivalry. That's the prevailing perspective. But it's out of whack.
Here's why. Life isn't about me winning and you losing. It's about us maximizing value (or at least increasing it.) {Net value - for all concerned - ought to be continually improved, wouldn't you agree? Value, and the Universe, is infinite in its potential. Let's go on the assumption that we can extend its outward horizons.}
In an imperfect world there are limits; you will concur, won't you, that this world isn't yet perfect. However, the better we can make the world, the more we remove the limits ....or at least extend them outward.
The ideal -- as many philosophers have written -- is balance, harmony, and clarity. If one overvalues things or systems, then one is doing it at the expense of other factors and qualities which are pushed aside. Our internal life is then out of balance. Systems (as well as theories, hypotheses, philosophical ideologies) are wonderful in their place. But if a focus on them results in dis-valuing people then one's life is full of needless stress. It will wear a person down and have other unwanted consequences. There is a price to pay for distorted thought processes. [Research has shown that some people are so preoccupied with rules, and with authority, that they 'step' on people.]
Those who believe, with all sincerity, that the universe is a remarkably harmonious system tend to be at peace with themselves. They have a serenity that others don't have. But those who overvalue that thought, rank it too high in their personal value pattern (their self-image), they are NOT at peace. They have a high need for it, but haven't a clue as to how to have it. They may be passionate and focused on many other aspects of life, but serene they are not.
As you know, thought processes may lead to behavior, but they are not behavior. Those who have tension - due to a habit of overvaluing or undervaluing - tend to develop compensating behaviors ...as research studies show: Due to frustration and anger, instead of "biting your head off", many individuals will bite their tongue - literally! That's behavior.
Yes, now and then our amygdala in our brain, lights up, it gets stimulated; some events (when interpreted) trigger it off. (The brain at that point seems to be hijacking our quest for morality, our striving to be a good person, to be ethical.) Then we show frustration. We are quick to anger. It happens. But if, at that moment, we ask ourselves a Centering Question [which Schoof & Demerest talk about in their work], the frustration tends to rapidly dissolve ! These new tools are now available. It is a new technology,, an ethical technology, applied Ethics at its best. You will learn even more about all this when - if anyone expresses an interest - I post a thread giving the steps to value creation.
Maybe enough has been said to provoke further discussion.
What do you think? Do you like the new moral technology presented here?