The proper Ethics, beyond these 2 basic rules
Well, congratullations, Astronuc. I think and behave similar to you.
Now, about my previous post, I think we can debate these points for a better dialogue:
1) All is believing. You were told or you readed (which is the same) all that you know, and you decided to believe somethings, and to not believe in another things. You can say you just learned from seeing and thinking, (cogito ergo sum), but even then you are believing... in your senses and mind (remember the concept of "illusion").
2) If you accept the previous, then you can say there are 2 ways to confront reality: believing in someone else, or believing in your own power to percieve and understand the world. I really think most of us use a combination of the 2. Think that, since childhood, we were told things and that speech conditioned our way of percieving the world. When mature, we think we independize ourselves from that, but I believe we are never totally independent from the people who surrounds us. This is matter of discusion, of course. And there is the inconscious, another big issue...
3) So, every body has a "point of view" and nobody´s point of view is equal to another people´s ones. If you accept this, then how will you ensure that all people agree to what is good, bad, better...?
4) Then, if all is relative like this, I think finally that both rules are good enough but basic, because they center in what YOU BELIEVE that is good or better. So these 2 rules are the most relative of all rules.
5) Now I think we as a whole can never agree to an Ethics of good and bad that could be accepted universally. So there must be many Ethics, may be not so relative as these 2 rules, but relative to a certain aspect of reality, like professional Ethics, for instance. Well, that IS what we have today, and I think is good enough.
6) If we have Ethics relative to what we do (professional, etc.), I think these are the best type of Ethics, just because they relate to action. In sanskrit it is called dharma. Then you must consider 2 aspects of this: (a) The social position of a person, meaning his/her role in society (not his riches, i.e.) and (b) the age of a person, because time passes by and all thinks change. Considering this 2 aspects of dharma is called "varna-ashrama dharma" in sanskrit, and it is intended to be a universal kind of Ethics. Take in account that all this is still relative, because social role and age are taken in account. So it is a universal relative Ethics
7) Now the point is that you need to ensure that everyone is aware of this, and that everyone is in proper position, this means in his/her proper role. Here role is a complex word, it can mean a job, but also your family duties, so let´s concentrate in your job.
8) Normally, we all go around from job to job searching for better incomes, instead of trying to find our best. "Our best" means that job where 2 conditions meet: that I am qualified to do it, and that I feel right doing it. If I don´t feel right doing it, it´s wrong; but I must also be qualified to do it.
9) So, what we mean here is that first of all, you must KNOW YOURSELF, what qualities you have, what you like the most, and so. And that´s why I posted before that we need a system to make everybody "mature enough". In fact, those systems exist. And I will tell you this: the easiest way to know yourself, is to ask other people about how they see you. Specially, if you can find a person who knows about these matters. In occident, there are psychologists. In orient, they are called "spiritual masters". Many people needs one of these. Others prefer the "self-made" way. And I think all that is OK.
---------------------------
Well, sorry for the extension, but hey! it´s heavy content here! Read it carefully, please. If you like this post, visit my blog
Southern Central for other interesting stuff.
).
.
