My Basic Philosphies and Where They Lead

My Basic Philosophies and Where They Lead Me

On law enforcement and deterrents:

I don’t want to simplify problems, but some basic points seem to cover a significant number of derivative problems.

One of the problems with laws is that we think an external deterrent imposed by society will actually deter people. It seems logical that it would. Most are told not to do something or act a certain way, and most will obey and act accordingly, unless:

The rule/law is or seems unreasonable,

The desire/need to break it is too strong

There is a basic flaw in one's ability to discern right from wrong.

The first two take care of themselves for the most part. If enough people feel a law is unreasonable, then the masses take the matter into their own hands and change the law. This is a problem when the majority is slim, and the law is contentious. Let’s set that aside.

The second is if the desire/need is too strong, like the need for money for food or shelter, it may cause one to commit a crime, like robbery or in some cases the need for respect can cause one to assault another like street crime, or a personal belief or opinion that is so deep seated that it causes one to act out, like attacks on abortion clinics and many wars, but let’s set wars aside too.

The third is the one we don’t really pay enough attention to, in my opinion. There are some born with an inability to discern right from wrong. Clinically, they are called psychopaths, sociopaths, or just deviants. I have no idea how many people on earth fit this category, but I feel that we acknowledge more than we realize. These are the ones who can tell a bald-faced lie and say it’s true while staring at evidence to the contrary. The ones who can steal what is not theirs and feel justified in doing so. The ones who feel their will is the only one that matters. Usual laws and penalties cannot deter these people, because they have no social conscience. This third category is the hardest for law-abiding humans to control. Yet, ironically, it contains some of the world’s financial and political leaders and all dictators. And, as we know, they get to dictate what is right and wrong. Laws are often bent to accommodate the power deviants.

Laws are at best gray and can only go so far to deter wrongdoing. And there is one main reason for that, because wrong is gray too! In this diverse world, there are many, many rights and wrongs. One country's terrorist is another country's hero.

What constitutes right and the law is really a majority of people’s belief and the power to uphold it. In Nazi Germany, there were lots of laws that are repulsive to nearly all now, but then and there, it was the law, and most blindly, fearfully, and begrudgingly complied. Had the Nazi’s won, this would be a much different world, and what is right now may not have been. One less dramatic example is birth control. The law says it is legal, barely, since only slightly less than the majority feel the law is just and right.

The strongest deterrent to any wrongdoing is one's conscience. It is the strongest prosecutor and the most damning jury. The notion of a guilty conscience is the greatest deterrent, and it is a strong reason why our social bonds and our desire to maintain decorum hold up.

I do not believe that individual action is motivated by the thought that it is wrong or evil. I believe that to be motivated, there must be some justification that the act is right, even if the logic and belief are twisted. Like a poor person justifying a robbery because “they have too much, I deserve it.” That, of course, does not make the act “right,” but it does make the deterrent less than effective if the mindset remains the same.

If in your conscience you feel you are doing what is right, then no law will deter you. Conversely, if you feel you are doing wrong, hopefully, your conscience will tell you, and you will either change or be prepared to accept the consequences. What about that third category, those who cannot or will not listen to their conscience’s. It is tragically unfortunate for them and mayhem creating for the rest of us.

Religious Fervor

Except for the defense of self and family, there may be no stronger defense than that of religion. Although beliefs range from the faithless atheistic to religious zealot, our belief systems are part of us, and we pledge allegiance to our beliefs. Most do not change religions, and missionaries are tasked with making sure there are as many believers as possible.

Our need to have an external organization that can answer the ultimate questions and to provide a moral compass is very strong. An internal compass or gyro that spins within us to keep us upright, citizens, is difficult to maintain, and a religious, political, social/moral affiliation is far easier. Being part of some greater entity is safe, even if that entity is not good and we do not believe all of it.

It seems reasonable that throughout time we have tried to answer life’s big questions and settled that an imaginary figure must be the answer to all those questions. Even scholarly scientists who explore some of the basic questions of life and the universe are often so overwhelmed that the final answer and their ultimate conclusion is god. It makes sense; otherwise, these questions would keep us worrying or worse.

With all the various religions and the myriad of idols and gods, it is clear they cannot all be the one true belief structure. Yet most religious practitioners strongly believe their god is the one true god. And many faiths and believers will fight to the death against any dissent or challenge to their one true god belief.

As has been stated many times, religion has led to wars over centuries and continues to this day. Why?

Freedom of speech

We cannot stop terrorism, we cannot stop bigotry, and we cannot stop religious persecution. All we can do is make it less desirable as a way for one to display their feelings. What we find distasteful and despicable is not grounds to silence it. In fact, the mere attempt to silence it will only inflame it.

Core values, no matter how loathsome or admirable, cannot be changed by squelching or promoting.

Listening, not silencing, tolerating and not eliminating, understanding and not ignoring are the ways to truly effect change.

To try to stop someone from doing what they feel is right only gives them the right to stop you from doing what you think is right. You are both wrong in the other's eyes, and only if you can peer through those eyes and feel what they feel and walk in their shoes do you have the ability to criticize. In fact, the critical analysis and the willingness to discuss that criticism is the best way to understand and perhaps tolerate the other view, and perhaps change that view or be changed by that view.

I have no right to tell you that you are wrong. But I have every right to convince you that I am correct.

That means the dialog should be encouraged, the open willingness to listen and not squelch should be supported. The arena for debate freely entered into, and the platforms from which the debaters stand are defended by all!

White supremacists, Nazi sympathizers, religious zealots, black lives matter supporters, abortion rights advocates, Islamic terrorists, GBLT communities, Right to Life supporters, and the list goes on, all have strong beliefs and will never be defeated, only temporarily contained.

Their inclusion in the dialog and an appropriate non threatening and transparent way for their views to be heard, included, and tolerated is the best way to have society get past this contentious time. Again, there will never be a time when strong opposing and distasteful views will be wiped from the face of the earth. There will only be times when they are driven into hiding, where they can fester and gain strength until there is another uprising.

Why do people have those feelings and beliefs?

I have beliefs and opinions. I could easily go into why I feel the way I feel and

We search our souls and get to a place where we say “yes, this is what is right and this is what I believe. That is a wonderful and curious thing, but imagine that those whom you disagree with go through that same process. I imagine that they have come to that standoff place where they are willing to defend and even proactively fight those who think of behaving another way. That is the way it is. Right or wrong, each of us has

Why not try it? What do you have to lose? Like trying a new food, you may develop a taste for it, or listening to music that is foreign, you may appreciate it. No one can or will force you to eat or

I say to you, the god-fearing and righteous ones who say your god and your religious instruction books told you to kill and assault. I say to you, the ones who think men and women are the only couples and those who are not should be shunned, shamed, or worse. I say to you who feel “your way or the highway” is right because you think it. What happens if you are wrong? What happens if your beliefs are only good for you?

I do not want to take sides. I feel taking sides is part of the problem. I prefer to see both sides and live my life in a way that respects opinions and beliefs that I may not feel are part of my core belief system. I want to live my life telling others to just stop for a moment and try to see the other side. They may find something that is meaningful and even strengthens their beliefs, but offers a cathartic relief that they don’t have to fight or defend, just believe, and as the expression goes, live and let live.

The amount of social angst is so high now, and the globe is getting smaller.

I feared more than a decade ago that communication advances and the intrusion into our supposed privacy would be a problem. Now I know it is!

TBC…