The Theory of being shows that specification of the precise nature of knowledge and ethics is not significant--that the discovery of the nature of knowledge and ethics, conceptually as well as operationally, is part of discovery in parallel with discovery of items of knowledge and particular ethical judgments. For example, a choice between teleological and deontological ethics need not be made and in the actual case, elements of both may apply and not necessarily in any fixed way
We would not expect that any ultimate ethics will respect the judgments of (our) proximate ethics
Note that natural ethics need not use the word or concept of ethics
Consider, for example, honesty. Some of us were taught that honesty is telling the truth (as we know it,) not telling a lie
Is it dishonest to tell an untruth to prevent a greater harm from happening? What if the perpetrator of a crime asks for information to help him commit the crime; is it dishonest to mislead him or her? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary goes a little deeper into the meaning of honesty and suggests the following meanings of honesty. 1a: free from fraud or deception b: genuine, real c: humble, plain 2a: reputable, respectable b: good, worthy 3: creditable, praiseworthy 4a: marked by integrity b: marked by free, forthright, sincere expression c: innocent, simple. The meanings that have been attached to the word honesty, go beyond merely telling the truth. We gain by this richness of meaning
At the same time, it could be said that the different meanings of honesty are in fact multiple words (word as symbol) and it remains that in the meaning of ‘telling the truth’ telling an untruth to avoid a crime is dishonest
However, if that is the case, in the meaning of telling the truth, honesty is not as useful an ethical ideal as it might have otherwise seemed. Either honesty as telling the truth should be limited to certain contexts, e.g. circles of trust such as a community, or the meaning of honesty should be allowed to expand, e.g., to integrity. Exceptions can always be found and therefore we admit that ethical ideas must be regarded as either contextual or flexible (or both)
Of course, this thought is not limited to ethical concepts. It is true of any artifact: when the same author is creator and place of meaning, there is freedom of meaning. This freedom has a trivial sense when the author is merely playing with ideas; and a deeper sense when, as in the ethical case, there is the following dual: a continual search for ideals of meaning that are reality based and continually changing contexts (social milieu.) The elements of the dual are not independent. Ideals may be thought of, on the reference side of meaning, as the meaning in the universal context
What of the non-artifactual case? Physical objects such as electrons are not artifacts. Does the meaning of ‘electron’ or of ‘matter’ adjust? It may be presumed that the electron or matter in general have some ultimate character but it does not follow that we know that ultimate character. Therefore, our knowledge of the electron and of matter may be in evolution. Especially in the case of matter, this means that the meaning of matter may evolve—e.g., from a place where it is thought to be distinct from other categories of being (such as mind) to a place where there is overlap or inclusion… and perhaps to a place where there is identity
We imagined the experiment in Journey in Being-New World of a God creating a universe; for that God, the electron is an artifact and therefore, for him or her, there may be a greater freedom in the meaning of ‘matter,’ ‘particle,’ and ‘electron
If there were universal ethical perfection there would be no ethics
Even though perfection is not feasible, reality is far from what is feasible
The reason, simply, does not lie in something else. It lies in (you and) me
This is an insight of a cinema such as American Gangster where almost everyone—cop and crook—is on the take. Another insight is, perhaps, the transformational effect of an individual stepping out of that way of life and transforming individual integrity into group action
What can we do?
Understand
Act
Talk
Share
Network
This occurs
Interactively—understanding and action
Recursively—understanding at more than one level, e.g., understanding the situation, understanding the possibilities and limits of understanding, understanding the nature of the ethical impulse and the world
The precautionary principle is a moral and political principle which states that if an action or policy might cause severe or irreversible harm to the public, in the absence of a scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those who would advocate taking the action—Raffensberger C, Tickner J (eds.) (1999) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Island Press, Washington, D. C.
It is sometimes said that the ‘principle’ that has guided policy in the Western World, especially the United States, is the ‘postcautionary principle,’ where there are threats of environmental damage, lack of scientific certainty shall not prevent the implementation of cost-effective measures
There is no single principle ‘pre’ or ‘post’ cautionary but a family of guiding ideas
…
The following points arise
Scientific certainty is hard to come by. Therefore decision making must nearly invariably be under uncertainty (in the certain case, assuming certainty of values and outcomes, there is no real decision to be made)
On both sides—e.g., industry and the environmentalists, scientific research is often motivated by funding. Therefore there is a critical need for independent funding and research that is also otherwise blind to the political implications of research
While it may be obvious that industry sponsored research is subject to bias, research sponsored by environmentalists is also subject to bias
Actual decisions should be made on a case by case basis
Such decisions should be made with regard to interaction of problems, in light of the best and actively pursued information, in timely manner, with all interests weighted into the decision
A portfolio of critical issues should be identified. A critical issue is one that, if ignored, local or problem specific fixes are at most temporary patches. World population is a fundamental critical issue that—as of 2007—appears to have lost focus and is barely mentioned in such concerns as global warming
While utopian action is not guaranteed a positive outcome, positive values and destiny are important and should inform decisions, actions and goals. A core of positive values and concern with destiny provides a reason for being—as does enjoyment of the moment. Concern with destiny may be softened by the thought that blind process appears to dominate evolution
A portfolio of problems and opportunities should also be maintained