Talking to myself - Chapter 3

Sub2. Are morals to be thought of the same way as ethics then?

Sub1. Yes and no. I will explain. First of coarse, we must remember that the human race is trying, and has been trying to survive as a whole. We must remember how often humans group together. No one person can cater to his needs and wants if he lives alone. Instead, when grouped, each human plays a part in a whole system, with some specialising in administration, some in farming, and etc.

Sub2. And where do we find these sort of people?

Sub1. Everywhere, idiot! Any place on earth with humans. There is almost no such thing as men making a living away from other groups of people. For the men who do live alone die alone, and therefore are disqualified from the game of survival that is life.

Sub2. So what does morals have to do with all of this grouping?

Sub1. Everything, idiot! We must presume the ideal society of humans to be flourishing and prosperous. And for this to happen, the people must be not greedy, but selfish in the long term. As in, even when exploiting, they must be careful to not take too much.

Sub2. Because the powerful must still be responsible over the week, because both need each other in order to survive?

Sub1. Precisely.

Sub2. Then why is it that even if ethics and morals are so important to humans, being the most powerful creatures on earth, there are so many who do not follow these codes of conduct?

Sub1. You presume that humans are the same wherever you go. This is an entirely wrong way of thinking, friend, for friend I consider you to be. We must presume that genetics is a workable theory and a workable idea. Meaning, genetics may make sense the way mathematics makes sense, but isn't as universaly acceptable as mathematics.

Sub2. And why is it that mathematics is so much more acceptable than the logic behind most of the sciences?

Sub1. As I've mentioned, the problem is language. But that is a topic for another time. Genetics shows us that perfection isn't possible without human intervention. For nature, as we discussed, has no consciousness, and is therefore random and often unfair. Especially since humans hold perfection so highly.

Sub2. You have strayed off topic.

Sub1. Yes, yes I have. But I blame you. Anyway. We must presume that long term selfishness is what seperates the strong from the weak. And the weak are presumably the less evolved. With this theory, we now see that because of the randmoness and inconsistency when it comes to genetics, oppurtunity, and so many other factors, some humans are not as evolved as others.

Sub2. You mean to say they are physically lacking?

Sub1. No, I mean to say their genetic memory is lacking. People presume evolution to always be about 'sprouting new limbs'. The mind has every right to evolve too, you know.

Sub2. And by mind, you mean our way of thinking?

Sub1. More or less that.

Sub2. So, now that we've established the use of morals, what does the law have to do with all this?

Sub1. Next post, my dear.