I have one ethical theory, but I'd be insulted to call it a substitution, it is one I've mentioned before.prof wrote: So, dear readers, if after you have done your homework you have any questions, or good ideas for upgrading, or a substitute ethical theory that you regard as superior, let us hear about it !!!!
The world is not a shopping list where you categorize your shopping items by their nature of being "systemic", "extrinsic" or "intrinsic". The first lesson in my "ethical theory" (opusology, which I call it, is not really ethics the old fashioned way, though it does produce results on where there's the most to gain) is that all the world is inherently zero-value, it's all the same. Then you introduce "time", and the universe becomes in conflict with itself, it starts changing, it starts assembling itself into a "whole", this whole is the metaphorical "image of the end-times". On its way to the end-times, time will shift about its interior, introducing new parts laying them atop of the old ones, but, because time consists of "before's" and "after's" it comes with an order, one which we represent by a line of proceeding dots, each dot representing a single change to the vast self-fulfilling puzzle of the universe.
These dots contains patterns, one pattern being the purest of all patterns: tendency. Tendency decides the rise and fall of all existences in our world, and from tendency we get causality powers; the powers that makes something become something, a power which really is just a memory of the "conditions" for when something exists in the world and when it doesn't. Because things comes back and disappears again, we call it "Lasting", instead of just "Being" or "Existing".
Now the human being has a interesting automation, far from unique, but still interesting, and that is the automation-to-completion. The human being will in its mind and its body be affected by the world and from itself and it will absorb the world, but in so doing adapting to it as well, and the result of this adaptation is a dependency relationship the human being always strives to balance, to make complete.
As the universe works its tendencies, another pattern emerges: the tendency for preference, for favourization, for choosing. The universe, in a sense, chooses what to do before anything else, and from this pattern another new pattern emerges: whenever something is supported by causality powers, by elements of conditionality, it "Lasts" in time, which is not the same saying it lasts any particular length, it is just a way of saying that it is stretching across a, or several particular lengths of time.
From this a graph can be created representing the Object of Lasting at a centre, with circles levelling outwards from it, each outer circle containing the inner circle within it. At the innermost circle a set of the constituent particles of the whole (the Object of Lasting) is drawn in blocks, each block contains sets of conditions for that particle to exist, to last, and in turn by lasting ensuring the completion of the Object of Lasting, that the Object itself lasts. The outer blocks contains the conditions of the conditions, and so on ad infinitum.
One such graph is called a Graph of Needs, because it displays shortages, because, one "block" only essentially requires one set to be present and which is itself supported by any outer set etc., but it would be a rather fragile Object of Lasting if a single change in the Graph would destroy it, or at least make it no longer itself. So a Graph of Needs tracks the number of "surplus" conditions and the "Need" is where the structure is the most critical. Changes to a Graph is tracked in real-world events, by what changes in the real world.
Several of these Graphs can be networked to each other to create both "variations", as over time most except only the most abstract things changes at least some and because of this one can vary between graphs, and, alternatively, to create a Map of Abilities, in each case all other Graphs except the one which is in time at the moment is an Ability-jump, and the map itself a kind of Ability Graph, it tells what are the alternatives for moving in Need-Space and the result of any such movement.
By mapping the world and time in Need-Space you acquire a deep understanding of your own place in the universe which is subject to the will of the universe, and you will travel in Need-Space as a companion of the universes' own destiny.
But where does value start? Value is like a chain, but like constellations on the star-map the lines are not there, you have to draw them yourself, and with value you may find that the Chain of Value can jump across space and therefore is not always subject to normal space travel which is one coordinate at a time. Value starts with the "automation-to-completion"! The automation starts when something seeks to grow. Now, it is fully possible to grow a logical set by cheating, and therefore there's a rule to automation-to-completion, and that is that any logical set which increases its size of elements is only valid if it does so under a System of Operative Rules, in other words, a filter to find the real changes to our concepts, those changes that we find belong strictly to the logical set and are not "garbage elements", things that travel along but does not have a real-world relationship with the elements of any significance.
Which filter, which "system of operative rules" is correct? Well, for one, you do not include changes to a person's philosophical beliefs when you study the human body, that could be interpreted as "garbage elements", changes that when included does not really belong with biological and physiological data. Any system of inquiry, like a science, must have strict rules for operating with other sciences, least you'll interpret data from two widely different conceptions in a similar fashion, yielding unintelligible results. For instance, what is metabolism of a social group? That makes no sense, of course you could rewrite it as a "group of human bodies", but a social group is not that, it is a completely different plane of inquiry with a completely different mindset, incompatible. Beyond that, any system will have to prove its efficiency as a tendency of the universe will have to prove its reliability.
A Chain of Value starts with its core, and its core is from where it extends, but the Chain of Value is not constant. Over time a Lasting itself, like an effect spreading across matter, extends from the core, "conquering" the world about it, making it part of the Object of Lasting and extending the object's stretch. This "conquest" is what being part of the universe is all about, because being part of the universe is about fulfilling the destiny of the universe itself, which is the image of end-time as a complete eternal and infinitely stretching domain of Lasting.
But when we human "conquer" the world into Lasting, we really are more "changing" it, like in manufacture or craft (as an anthropocentric example), we take the world and we bend it to be a supporting structure for the mountain of conditions supporting our domain of Lasting.
An important point is that to gain accuracy, atomization of all graphs is essential.
So you see, THIS is value, value is adding conditionality, and ETHICS is about "conquering" the world from within your core self, building a structure of lasting, it's about getting accurate, finding where exactly does my core's lay? And find out which is the next target to be made part of the domain of Lasting. This is not to say that any time the universes' destiny goes before your own, that is essentially not even a relevant thought, because all you do is work from your innermost point of view, and that is itself a blessing to the universe. It is really equating ethics with a maximized gain tactic, but with first finding what the targets are.
Each core, or automation-to-completion, as it interacts with the world, it creates Cultural Pipelines, which is to say each core has its own culture it projects (in a non-anthropocentric sense) and it applies unto the world that culture making the world friendly to itself, the "pipeline" meaning that it constructs metaphorically a pipeline around the flows of changes in the world, controlling not so much in detail as in direction, but the more pipelines the more it can filter and direct to smaller places. Natural Pipelines are situations that by nature are preferable and require none or little of cultivation.
A way of finding the targets more directly, is to look on the world stretching from you and find what parts of the world are, by a system of operative rules, waning or ceasing to exist, or same with growth, look at what grows by a system of operative rules, and figure out how to affect both situations so as to reinforce your structure of lasting.
It was a random thought, not a refined idea, though it is inspired by a system of frameworking I created another place.prof wrote:{I examined, and studied, the 'Ethics as Central Processing' concept, and I have good reason to believe it will - once it is put into effect, and its ongoing work is done - arrive at the same principles and conclusions as the theory described in the papers and essays downloadable via the links at the end of the first post above.}