ETHICAL ? "ASK EGO !"

https://twitter.com/tzuru/status/650090247641022464

The Ethics of Socrates 
Abstract: The ethics of Socrates is briefly outlined.

1. Socrates' Life (469-399 BC): Several features of Socrates' life give some insight into his ethics.
   1. As a young man in battle, he distinguished himself for bravery several times.
   2. Socrates exhibited a "daimon" (his genuis or demon)--a sign or inner voice which issued prohibitory messages in periods of dazes (suggestive of epilepsy).
   3. The Delphic Oracle: "There is no person living wiser than Socrates." Socrates interpreted this response as indicating his purported wisdom was simply that he knew he was not wise.
   4. His persistent questioning of authorities and public figures was probably aimed not to humiliate but to discover truth with a view to the good life.
      1. Socrates considered himself a gadfly annoying the state.
      2. The "Socratic irony"--the profession of ignorance was probably sincere but exaggerated because of his presumptions..
      3. Socrates irreverent cross-examination of prominent persons aimed not to humiliate but to discover truth with a view to finding the good life.
   5. The great example of the trial and death of Socrates demonstrated, as well, the agreement between his character and his philosophy.
      1. Socrates was found guilty of impiety (not worshipping the gods the state worships), corruption of the youth (infusing into the young persons the spirit of criticism of Athenian society), among other accusations.
      2. Socrates refused to leave Athens, although he could have escaped: (1) escape would have been contrary to his moral principles and (2) escape would have been an injustice to the state which was his parent, education, and origin of law.
      3. Apology [28B]: "You are mistaken my friend, if you think that a man who is worth anything ought to spend his time weighing up the prospects of life and death. He has only one thing to consider in performing any action--that is, whether he is acting right or wrongly, like a good man or a bad one" trans. Hugh Tredennick.
2. Socrates was predominantly interested in ethics.
   1. Self-knowledge is the sufficient condition to the good life.  He identified knowledge with virtue. If knowledge can be learned, so can virtue.  Thus, virtue can be taught.
   2. The unexamined life is not worth living. One must seek knowledge and wisdom before private interests.  Knowledge is sought as a means to ethical action.
   3. What one truly knows is the dictates of one's conscience or soul:  the philosophy of the Socratic Paradox.
3. Socrates' ethical intellectualism has an eudaemological character.
   1. Socrates presupposed reason was the way to the good life.
      1. Our true happiness is promoted by doing what is right.
      2. When your true utility is served (tending your soul), you are achieving happiness. Happiness is evident from the long-term effect on the soul.
      3. The Socratic ethics has a  teleological character -- mechanistic explanation of human behavior is mistaken. Human action aims toward the good, and there is purpose in nature.
   2. The Socratic Paradox: People act immorally, but they do not do so deliberately.
      1. Everyone seeks what is most serviceable to oneself or what is in one's own self-interest.
      2. If one [practically] knows what is good, one will always act in such manner as to achieve it. (Otherwise, one does not know or only knows in a theoretical fashion.)
      3. If one acts in a manner not conducive to ones good, then that person must have been mistaken (i.e., that person lacks the knowledge of how to obtain what was serviceable in that instance).
      4. If one acts with knowledge then one will obtain that which is serviceable to oneself or that which is in ones self-interest.
      5. Thus, for Socrates…
         • knowledge = [def.] virtue, good, arete
         • ignorance = [def.] bad, evil, not useful
      6. Since no one knowingly harms himself, if harm comes to that person, then that person must have acted in ignorance.
      7. Consequently, it would seem to follow we are responsible for what we know or for that matter what we do not know. So, then, one is responsible for ones own happiness.
      8. The essential aspect of understanding the Paradox is to realize that Socrates is referring to the good of the soul in terms of knowledge and doing what's right—not to wealth or freedom from physical pain. The latter play no role in the soul being centered.
   3. No one chooses evil or chooses to act in ignorance.
      1. We seek the good, but fail to achieve it by ignorance or lack of knowledge as to how to obtain it.
      2. No one would harm themselves. When harm comes to us, we thought we were seeking the good, but we lacked knowledge.
      3. Aristotle's criticism: an individual might know what is best, yet still do what's wrong.
   4. Socrates' influence extended to almost all areas of the history of ethics in the West.

	Socratic Ethics
Platonism	Hedonism	Cynicism	Stoicism
teleological character	Aristippus Epicurus	Diogenes	Zeno of Citium Epictetus Marcus Aurelius
"the good"	happiness	the example of Socrates	emotional independence; self-knowledge

IV. Objections to the Socratic Ethics

1. If evil is never done deliberately or voluntarily, then evil is an involuntary act and no one can properly be held responsible for the evil that is done.
2. Since the good is that which furthers a person's real interests, it will follow that if the good is known, people will seek it.  But they don't.
3. If moral laws are objective and independent of feelings, and if knowledge is identified with virtue, then it would seem to follow that moral problems are always capable of rational resolution.  But they are not.
4. Psychiatric evidence is that people behave in an entirely self-damning manner.  St Paul said, "The good that I would do, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do."
5. Freud's disclosure of the unconscious indicates that reasoning is rationalization.

---

Recommended Sources

Plato's Apology:  Lecture notes on the trial of Socrates are given in Introduction to Philosophy. 

Ethics Ethical Egoism 

Abstract:  The various forms of ethical egoism are defined. Standard objections to ethical egoism are evaluated, and the conclusion is drawn that ethical egoism is incomplete.

I. Ethical egoism is the prescriptive doctrine that all persons ought to act from their own self-interest.

1. Personal ethical egoism is the belief that only I should act from the motive of self-interest, nothing is stated about what motives others should act from.
   
   1. Personal ethical egoism is not a theory because it is not generalized to others.
   2. I cannot recommend personal ethical egoism to others because such a recommendation would be against my own self-interest.
2. Individual ethical egoism is the prescriptive doctrine that all persons should serve my self-interest (i.e.,egotism)
   
   1. Individual ethical egoism is a belief that can't be consistent unless it applies to just one person. In other words, this belief is not universalizable.
   2. Practically speaking, the doctrine is similar to solipsism—there's no way to justify the belief since it applies to just one person.
3. Universal ethical egoism is the universal doctrine that all persons should pursue their own interests exclusively.
   
   1. One problem is without knowledge of the world, how can we truly know what's in our best interest? (c.f. the Socratic Paradox).
   2. Another problem is trying to figure out what "their own interests" means. Does this phrase mean short-term or long-term benefit, pleasure, happiness, preference, or something else? What gives you pleasure might not be a benefit or in your interest.

---

A theory of ethics should

1. set forth systematically the first principles of morality
2. show how to justify these principles, and, as a result,
3. elucidate a conception of a life of excellence for people.

Therefore, the theory should be both consistent and complete.

1. Consistency:  there should be no contradictions or incompatible statements.
   
   e.g., the injunctions from folklore morals, "Haste makes waste" and "Look before you leap" would be inconsistent with "A stitch in time saves nine," or "The race is to the swift."
2. Completeness: there should be no moral truth which is not provable from the basic moral principles of the theory.
   
   e.g., In Christian ethics, the principle "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's" (Matthew 22:21) is meant to distinguish between secular and religious situations in order to avoid political difficulty for religious belief and so would be an incomplete theory of action in the secular realm.

Consequently, the three ways to raise objections to an ethical theory is to show that the theory is 

1. mistaken in truth or
2. inconsistent or
3. incomplete.

---

I.  Charge: Ethical egoism is contradictory because it allows one and the same act to be evaluated as both right and wrong.  Charge: the theory is mistaken in truth; it is inconsistent.

1. Example: suppose Jack is competing against Jill for a job. Ethical egoism would say
   1. It's right for Jack to praise Jack's qualities.
   2. It's wrong for Jill to praise Jack's qualities.
      
      Therefore, praising Jack's qualities is both right and wrong—right for Jack and wrong for Jill.
2. But this is not to say the same act is both right and wrong—these are two different acts: one is done by Jack and one is done by Jill.
3. The best that can be said is that there is a conflict of interest which could be settled by contract law. Hence, this is not a good objection.

II. Charge: Ethical egoism is committed to giving inconsistent advice. (The charge is inconsistency.)

1. Example: Jack and Jill are competing for a job.
   1. We tell Jack to do his best and we tell Jill to do her best, or
   2. Jack tells Jill to be an altruist.
   3. Isn't this inconsistent?
2. But there is no inconsistency. All statements are consistent with Jack's interest. There is no formal contradiction. In contest in sports we can hope that each team will do its best without contradiction; in fact, we can even hope that each team wins without contradiction..

III. Charge: If the (universal) egoist believes that each person should promote his own interest, then isn't he acting against his own interest to state his theory. (The charge is inconsistency.)

1. Example: Jack believes that Jill should promote her own interest in accordance with ethical egoism.
   1. Jack might believe this, but he isn't going to tell Jill.
   2. He looks to his own interest first.
2. Again, there is no inconsistency in not telling Jill.

IV. Charge: There are certain interpersonal decisions that have to be made that transcend the egoist's point of view. (The charge is of incompleteness)

1. Example: Where the hirer for a particular job has no personal stake, who should he choose for a job when the candidates have equal qualifications:  Jack or Jill?
2. This objection holds good—there have to be some impartial decisions, and the belief that each person should seek his own interest does not tell how a person should act in this instance.
   1. Hence, the theory of ethical egoism  is incomplete.
   2. When there is a conflict of interests between egoists, egoism provides no way to resolve the conflict.

V. Final Comments on Ethical Egoism:  the egoist is often seen to be egotistical and selfish, rather someone acting under enlightened self-interest.

• Life is not seen as a contest between people so much as it is a challenge. If someone an egoist, then that person does not necessarily act against my own self-interest.
• Some observations are in order.

1. Acting in one's self-interest very often benefits others.
   1. E.g., your going to college is in your self-interest, and it will help keep you off welfare. In pursuing your self-interest, you will get a job which will benefit others.
   2. E.g., you start a business to make money, but you must have satisfied employees and a competitive product thereby helping others.
2. The egoist is affected by many more events than one would first think. I.e., it is in his interest to think about others.
   1. If the egoist doesn't help others to be happy, they will not return the favor.
   2. Often, it is in our own interest to look to our long-term interests by the effects of our actions on other people as a group. Hence, there is no inconsistency for the egoist to help a group of which he is a part.
      
      E.g., An ethical egoist can act in self-interest by contributing to the Salvation Army or to the United Fund.

VI. If the egoist is to choose what is in his own interest, then he must have the personal freedom to choose.

1. Hence, the egoist must allow everyone to pursue his own personal interest (universal ethical egoism).
2. Consequently, egoism leads into a right-based theory-each individual has certain inalienable rights or
3. Egoism leads to a rule-based theory that certain rules of conduct are in the interest of everyone to observe. That is we are all better off if everyone obeys the law—we have to give up some good to achieve our maximum possible good.

Recommended Sources

Solipsism: An excellent discussion of the role of solipsism in the history of Western and Eastern philosophy and its role as a limiting case in thought experiments and epistemology from Wikipedia. See also from this source links to various related concepts to egoism including ethical egoism.

Ethical Egoism: A section of the entry "Egoism" discussing arguments for and against by Robert Shaver published in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Ethical Egoism: A section of the entry "Egoism' from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy by Alexander Moseley emphasizing conflict resolution.

The study of models brings MANY to the conclusion that, if a complete and non-conflicting model for ethical decision-making is at all possible to exist, it could only be a procedural one. The procedural decision-making model treats the process of decision making as a "step by step" procedure - define the problem, identify available alternative solutions of the problem, evaluate the identified alternatives, make the decision, implement the decision, evaluate the decision.

A Bright IDEA! Ethics Matter.

 Around the world planned, prepared and executed strategies for dealing with all of humanities everything are in constant flow. Behind the scenes, a whole host of issues and ethical dilemmas are being sorted out constantly, these values are the hosts of all that can or should be sustainable about how we humans as the alpha species of this age can collectively sustain our species while certainly celebrating our lives as members of, and senior responsible species for ensuring the wellness of all species. We have become aware that our engagements with extractive practices that destroy or alter prime resources in ways that impact negatively upon all life. W know with absolute exactitude and clear certainty that humanities progress cannot be sustainable when it is at the expense of our global wellness. We can evaluate our advances as being on the back of unhygienic behaviors that can no longer be tolerated when know alternative approaches to global economic activity can move from non renewable to renewable sustainable. While the shift to a global bio economy may take many decades our ideology is to plant the seeds of the bio economy and to allow the expansion of bio economy to be organically led as a citizen owned renewable sustainable enterprises and services banking facility running alongside the current fossil driven economy, parasitically sucking the life of this sector into expanding the life of our future hygienically managed planet.

Scotiaaghelek1306 like Robert the Bruce, has adopted the IDEA Ethical Decision Making Framework. A man in advance of his times, ken.

The IDEA acronym provides a step-by-step guide to managing ethical issues.

“Having a shared decision-making tool provides an easy to use and consistent method of addressing ethical issues across entire tiny ( individual citizens) to global organizations, the planetary systems entire if you will,”.

With a Citizen owned Sustainable Environment Bank, the currencies are the social - environmental values that arise from sustainability ideology. the focus of this has most to do with enlivening the valuation of ones life from an early age to be able to think constructively, proactively with ones immediate society and environment in order to progress ones livelihood sustainably while having due regard for your connectivity and shared ownership over the wellbeing of all of humanities resources, all species valued, our planets wellbeing. There is zero difficulty in translating this IDEA to every citizen of the world nation by nation. These values are the bankable core values we must all adhere to if we are to collaborate to ensure sustainable life for all. The business to hand is to establish and champion this leading ideology so that ultimately humanity is becoming culturally competent.

"Cultural competence is the ability to engage with, and/or create conditions, that maximize the optimal sustainable utility of resources throughout the planet for all living species. The core values that cause man to seek to ensure quality of life for all are bonded to our progress towards our goals of being humankind, currently we are human-unkind, we know we can be far more competent as stewards of planetary health when we express our immediate values as constant contributions that are constant conflict resolutions in minute that build to bond humanity gathering relentlessly towards sustainable renewable hygienic goals"

Freud suggested that our super-ego's come online at the age of five. The ability to know right from wrong. IDEA is simple in any language. It is sustainable thought from childhood. It is knowing from birth that no matter the currency of exchange you have the values that are part of the global value of all peoples immediate to where they are and, aware of their micro to global status's. Here lies a more rounded grounded way to work towards sustainable currency exchanges from primary values. Potentially the sustainability of governments, companies and organizations so it's no surprise that there is constant conflict resolution from novel ideologies arising so progress of resource distributions are more rapid more focused and of course most helpful to life.