Doing what is correct and avoiding the wrong

What is Morality? Icon

December 17, 2019

In a previous post , we explained that everything in existence has a dharma which represents the design or plan made by its inventor or creator.

  • A smartphone is designed to withstand being dropped a few feet, but not many meters
  • A basketball, on the other hand, is designed to withstand being dropped from long distances

We can say that the dharma of a smartphone in this sense is different from that of a basketball.

Phone and a smartphone
A smartphone has a nature very different from a basketball

This dharma then leads to the different “do’s and dont’s” or “moral rules” for handling:

  • A smartphone must be held carefully and not dropped, but a basketball can be thrown long distances
  • A smartphone can be put inside your pocket, but a basketball cannot

Here we can see that morality differs on the objects and its situation in space and time.

  • A bulky cellphone in the 1980’s cannot be put inside the pocket, different from a modern cellphone
  • A rubber ball made 200 years ago will not survive being dunked, very different from a modern basketball

Similarly among humans, the moral rules of a certain time period can be very different from that of another even in the same place. For example:

  • the early Jews had a policy of an eye-for-an-eye
  • this was later reversed by Jesus who advocated forgiveness
  • this was then overturned by the Prophet Mohammad who sanctioned revenge or punishment

The difference in the Jewish and Islamic moral policy from that of Jesus, is due to the fact that the former was created during a disorderly time when the people were under constant threat from Assyrians, Babylonians, and Arab tribes. Jesus, on the other hand, lived in a stable period under Roman rule.

The Romans provided a lot of stability

In this case, the difference in political condition led to differences in moral policy. This is then due to the fact that politics, laws, and morals are all based on feelings which change through time. These changing feelings change what humans are supposed to do and not do.

Why do our feelings change?

Feelings change because they are a metaphysical wave* that comes in contact with physical space-time. A wave has crests and troughs and are never a straight line. These ups and downs leads to the morals of one era being overturned by another era, to be itself overturned later. Because of this, even academics are unable to accurately define morality.

Visualization of music
Feelings always change just like waves

*Our definition of morality is based on our Metaphysics of Things which splits existence into a metaphysical layer made up of waves, and a physical layer made up of particles, such as quark-particles and soul-particles existing in space and time.

Similarly, a rubber sports ball can change its design, size, and other specification depending on what sports people feel is the best one. A cellphone can add more features and become a smartphone because its manufacturer feels the need for improvement. Both changes aim for the maximum usefulness or “good” for the ball and phone respectively.

A Proper Defintion of Morals

In humans, the universal good is happiness. With this in mind, we can define human morals or do’s and dont’s as:

  • Moral — a quality that produces happiness for now and for as long as possible, for the self and for as many entities as possible. We define entities as anything that the mind regards as having an identity
  • Morality — a state of being moral
  • Moral Philosophy — the organized system of ideas designed to bring about morality

Notice that our definition of moral is not absolute in the sense that it does not include infinity nor all entities. The phrase “for as long as possible” forces the mind to think of future consequences, while “as many entities as possible” forces the ego to go outside of the self.

The root idea behind morality is happiness which, according to our Metaphysics of Things, is a positive wave from which other positive waves, such as virtues, come about. Hume’s first virtues are justice and benevolence. This matches the idea of Socrates, who put prime importance to justice (which we interpret as dharma).

We shall begin by looking into the social virtues of benevolence and justice. This will then lead us to other social virtues. An Enquiry Concerning The Principles Of Morals

By forcing the mind to think into the future and into other entities, the mind will naturally discover the patterns that will point to the dynamics of a Supreme Entity that works behind the scenes to generate reality and existence. This would force backward humans to get their minds out of the monkey-state where the mind does not think and the heart does not feel. This then will replace the animal morals of mere eating, sleeping, having sex, marking territory, etc.

How is Superphysics Morals Different The Greatest Happiness Principle?

The John Stuart Mill also advocated a principle of happiness similar to Epicurus and Benhtam:

The Greatest Happiness Principle says that actions which promote happiness are moral, actions which produce the reverse of happiness are immoral Utilitarianism Simplified

The two main differences between Superphysics Morals and such Utilitarian Morals is that the latter is:

  • based on pleasure from shallow sensory percetions, usually from the material layer
  • based on such pleasure as a short-term effect or instance of pleasure

Superphysics Morals, on the other hand, is based on the higher pleasures, specifically from the spatial (mental) and aethereal layers (spiritual)

Science versus Superphysics

The spatial layer is why Superphysics morals focuses on maximum people and maximum length of time.

Morals are Sensed by the Moral Sense as Conscience and the Common Interest

We defined “moral” as a quality that produces lasting happiness. If physical beauty is a quality that produces aesthetic satisfaction sensed through our eyes, and melody is a quality that produces audible pleasure sensed through our ears, how do we sense what is moral or immoral? Our post on Supersociology explains this sense.