Philosophy Now Forum

Blaggard wrote:... do like your ideas though

...Seems you're a victim of writing a "perfect" post, one with which no one can disagree with. Sometimes if you get no replies, no news is good news.

prof wrote:Hi, Seagull

In my published book, SCIENCES OF MAN AND SOCIAL ETHICS, I have a chapter entitled "Human Nature: Its Cause and Effect", pp.85 ff. It incorporates Formal Axiology (a discipline which thinks deeply about human values, and researches applied value theory) with Maslow's hierarchy of needs. The integration of the two models, with factual evidence cited to support the resulting claims,s yields an explication of what people want - from the need to survive all the way to the need for self-actualization (which Dr Abraham Maslow has, in his writings, extensively described, giving actual living examples.)

The hardcover book, which came out in 1969, is now rare; though The Library of Congress will have a copy for you, as will many good university libraries. Amazon can make one available too.

Seagull, you ask what I'm trying to do, you offer a couple of alternatives. My answer is: Both. Have you yet read, and studied, Basic Ethics (2014), which offers a systematic approach, and discusses 'what people want' among other topics? A (safe to open) link to it is here: http://tinyurl.com/mfcgzfz




I wish you all a Quality Life
{As to what this means, see my earlier thread here: Steps to Value Creation.}

prof wrote:If a person is alone on a desert island he is subject only to the laws of nature: he wants to avoid hurting himself.

Now it turns out there is another individual on this island. The first fellow thought he was all alone but he was mistaken. Now, though, social interaction enters the picture. He is subject to the laws of human nature, to what we may refer to as 'the moral law.' Now we generalize the principle; it becomes Do no harm! Now he doesn't want to hurt another, because if he did, he wouldn't get the benefits of cooperation to build a better quality of life for the both of them.

Once one knows his ethics he is okay with caring, sharing, and cooperating.

Note that there is a definition of "ethics" and an axiom of "ethics." The definition of ethics is a perspective we have, a way of regarding an individual, or a group of individuals. It is this: when you view an individual as of uncountably-high value, you are in the field of Ethics, you are being ethical.

The 'Axiom of Ethics' is this: Make things morally better!"

Both the definition and the axiom have lots of implications, a lot of principles may be deduced from them. {And, yes, I can define my key terms - upon request.} Here are some of the implications that follow:

If someone is that valuable, then you wouldn't want to harm them. Hence you wouldn't want to degrade them in any way, bring them down, humiliate them, disparage them, hurt their feelings.

If you are dedicated to making things morally better you would put people first. Why? Because you, knowing your ethics, are aware that all the systems, ideologies, theories in the world aren't worth one material thing; and all the things in the world aren't worth one conscious human life. {This can be shown in the body of useful information that goes by the name of Ethics.} The word 'morally' suggests that things are to be made better for people.

How make things better in general? You shall ask yourself in situations that come up in daily life: How can I, in this situation, upgrade it, improve it, enhance it, boost a person up, be helpful, make a difference, make others happy, innovate, be creative, produce harmony, close up any perceptual gaps that exist, or in some way maximize the value? Thus improving human relationships, being more inclusive, building a sense of family or community will be your aim. It follows that gaining the know-how to achieve this aim efficiently will also be your aim and your commitment. The concept of 'value-added' is very important in the business world, and it is even more relevant if one wants to be ethical.

As a teacher of ethics I would argue that - agreeing with the insight of Aristotle - everything aims for the good. Everyone is doing the best they can; if they knew better, they would do better. The claim being made is that the cause of all our problems (in the human realm) is ignorance. Knowledge is the answer. This includes knowing how. If the person who seems most malicious knew vividly the benefits of living an ethical life in an ethical world, and if that individual knew HOW to have high ideals and to live up to them - as Ethics directs one to do - then that party, aiming for the good, and understanding how to arrive at it, would no longer be malicious. What does it mean to be "good"?

Something is good if it has all the properties necessary to fulfill its purpose (its meaning.) The ultimate purpose, according to Ethics, is to provide a quality life for one and all.

An individual is good if s/he has ethical ideals and lives up to them. ...practices what s/he preaches. "Talks the talk, and walks the walk." Ethical ideals are kindness, empathy, compassion, integrity, authenticity, genuineness, sincerity, honesty, etc. They all indicate much the same - a person who knows his ethics. Morality - as explained in detail in the thread here "What is Morality?" -is self being true to true self; it is authenticity. Being real, not a phony. Being transparent: saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. Instead of 'scoring points' you want to compose value.

There is more to ethics, of course. This will do for now.


Comments, questions, responses on point? What do you think of this presentation? I have tried it out on people in all walks of life, putting it in their words; the responses have all been good.
Let's hear your enhancements......

prof wrote:Now, money makes the world go round.

Let's get to a place where ethics makes the world go round. Let's make the world work - for everyone! The 'science' (the systematic study) of Ethics can help do this - once the concepts are absorbed. Moral health is as important as physical health.


Of course, a vast field - such as ethics or physics - cannot be summed up in a sentence. Only a fool would even try. The ethical theory proposed in the little booklet (23 pp.) with the title BASIC ETHICS, is - as any intelligent reader can discern - expandable by applying the analytic tools it offers to other aspects of ethical data besides those mentioned in the essay - electronically published in 2014. {Most books these days, to cut costs, are printed with a much tinier font than this manuscript employs. If a smaller type-size were used, and if printed on both sides, this booklet would become much smaller. But there is no substitute for someone neglecting to do his homework. How learn if one won' study??} Can a document written this year be accurately called "ancient?

The analytic tools to which I refer are the three dimensions of value. They have very wide application, as will be apparent to the reader.

Ginkgo wrote:

prof wrote:... Now we generalize the principle; it becomes Do no harm! Now he doesn't want to hurt another, because if he did, he wouldn't get the benefits of cooperation to build a better quality of life for the both of them.

Once one knows his ethics he is okay with caring, sharing, and cooperating.

Note that there is a definition of "ethics" and an axiom of "ethics." The definition of ethics is a perspective we have, a way of regarding an individual, or a group of individuals. It is this: when you view an individual as of uncountably-high value, you are in the field of Ethics, you are being ethical.

The 'Axiom of Ethics' is this: Make things morally better!"

....Knowledge is the answer. This includes knowing how. If the person who seems most malicious knew vividly the benefits of living an ethical life in an ethical world, and if that individual knew HOW to have high ideals and to live up to them - as Ethics directs one to do - then that party, aiming for the good, and understanding how to arrive at it, would no longer be malicious. What does it mean to be "good"?

Something is good if it has all the properties necessary to fulfill its purpose (its meaning.) The ultimate purpose, according to Ethics, is to provide a quality life for one and all.

...Morality is, by definition in this system, self being true to true self; it is authenticity. Being real, not a phony. Being transparent: saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. Instead of 'scoring points' you want to compose value.

There is far, far more to ethics, of course. This will do for now.


Comments, questions, responses on point? What do you think of this presentation? I have tried it out on people in all walks of life, putting it in their words; the responses have all been good. - Let's hear your enhancements......

Prof, what about the person who doesn't want to make things morally better because they choose to pursue something that is only in their interest? In other words, they don't or won't acknowledge the fact that looking after other people's interest is really in their interest?

prof wrote:

Ginkgo wrote:

prof wrote:... Now we generalize the principle; it becomes Do no harm! Now he doesn't want to hurt another, because if he did, he wouldn't get the benefits of cooperation to build a better quality of life for the both of them.

Once one knows his ethics he is okay with caring, sharing, and cooperating.

Note that there is a definition of "ethics" and an axiom of "ethics." The definition of ethics is a perspective we have, a way of regarding an individual, or a group of individuals. It is this: when you view an individual as of uncountably-high value, you are in the field of Ethics, you are being ethical.

The 'Axiom of Ethics' is this: Make things morally better!"

....Knowledge is the answer. This includes knowing how. If the person who seems most malicious knew vividly the benefits of living an ethical life in an ethical world, and if that individual knew HOW to have high ideals and to live up to them - as Ethics directs one to do - then that party, aiming for the good, and understanding how to arrive at it, would no longer be malicious. What does it mean to be "good"?

Something is good if it has all the properties necessary to fulfill its purpose (its meaning.) The ultimate purpose, according to Ethics, is to provide a quality life for one and all.

...Morality is, by definition in this system, self being true to true self; it is authenticity. Being real, not a phony. Being transparent: saying what you mean, and meaning what you say. Instead of 'scoring points' you want to compose value.

There is far, far more to ethics, of course. This will do for now.


Comments, questions, responses on point? What do you think of this presentation? I have tried it out on people in all walks of life, putting it in their words; the responses have all been good. - Let's hear your enhancements......

Prof, what about the person who doesn't want to make things morally better because they choose to pursue something that is only in their interest? In other words, they don't or won't acknowledge the fact that looking after other people's interest is really in their interest?

Hi Ginkgo,

When you write "that is only in their interest" you should (more properly) say: "that is only in their selfish interest." If they knew their true self-interest they would want to make things morally better


.