My Ethical System

 

I would like to believe that ethics is my strong suit, but for sure it is a primary interest of mine.

 

My basic system is in place, but this layout is an attempt to make it more clear, internally coherent, and understandable.

 

First, a set of definitions. I think a moral or spiritual conservative is a thinker that accepts that each person has a human nature that she is born with, and that she is born in sin, so she is basically evil, more than basically morally neutral or basically good.

 

A moral or spiritual liberal is the person that denies people have an essential nature, or if they do, they are basically good or born moral neutral.

 

Second, traditional Christians and Jews posited that people were born depraved, and I believe that is how we are engineered by nature and God. All of we moral conservatives assume that people are still good enough naturally that bringing up a child right, to be a good person, will usually work if the child is disciplined, loved, and provided with exemplary modeled behavior by parents and other adults. At some point, each child that becomes civilized or socialized, does so only from her own free will, internalizing the lessons taught by her elders. She at some point chose to do good and be good, and then is willing for a lifetime to control and limit her natural self and do battle with her savage nature. As a virtuous, religious adult of fine moral fiber, she will become a good person who will lead a virtuous life.

 

Third, traditional, conservative Christians and Jews define evil as the selfish, egotistical, egoistic, and undisciplined natural child. To become a good person, the child must learn to be well-mannered, self-curtailing and other-centered most of the time.

 

I define the naturally evil child as instinctively altruistic or evil. She needs to learn to be good, which is loving herself and seeing to her personal but enlightened self-interest most of the time. By caring for and loving herself, especially if she comes to lead a life of self-realization, in service of the Good Spirits, she then will be filled with wholesome self-esteem so that she loves herself, loves God, and other people, and thus is kind most of the time to all three categories of sentient  beings.

 

Traditional Christians and Jews define evil as selfishness, and, selflessness or altruism as noble-natured.

 

I, like Ayn Rand, identify selfishness or self-interest as virtue, and selflessness, or group-living, and an inferior,  nonindividuating existence of low self-esteem as so filling the mediocre non-achiever with self-loathing, that in their anger, rage, ingratitude, pessimism, nihilism, hatred, resentment, and bitterness, that he takes revenge on himself and others, and may well might ally himself actively with evil spirits.

 

In light of these ethical codes held by traditional Christian and Jewish thinker versus myself, I suggest that they are psychological egoists that preach that each sinful child needs God for incoming spiritual goodness, and a healthy dose of living in accordance with the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments, which are tantamount to favoring normative altruism and rational altruism.

 

I, by contrast, am a psychological altruist, maintaining that each sinful child is self-loathing and other-loathing, because she is born in self-hatred, and group-lives and that reinforces her wicked living style.

 

She needs primarily to learn to individuate, follow the Divine Couple, Jesus and the Good Spirits in an ethical mode rational egoism/rational altruism and normative egoism/normative altruism