Pregled posta

Adresa bloga:


Survival is not moral or immoral per se, since the motivation for life doesn't come from morality, but from life itself.

And life per se is not determined by any kind of right or lack of right. The right to live comes into play, as I explained, only vis a vis other members of a system of exchanges.
So for you, another person has the right to live, if you are part of a social contract recognizing the life of others, and for them it is the same: you have the right to live from their perspective.

But for life in itself, outside the context of a social contract, there is no right or not-right to live. It is something outside the domain of definition of rights and morality, as it is not defined by any exchange or contract.

(I know that this may be difficult to intuitively understand, because of the interpersonal nature of our identities and the way we are aware of ourselves as selves. We project the "others" from our interpersonal identity, and the reciprocity of exchange with them, into the non-human and even into the non-living universe, as some kind of absolute, but this is a psychological illusion coming from the structure of the interpersonal self.)

What is moral or immoral is our relationship as individual lives with the life goal of survival of our collectivity. And in that relationship of vertical exchange of contributions to life, individuals have with the collective, one of the moral duties they get in that exchange is to preserve and advance the life of that collectivity, in this case, their race.

It is also connected to the holistic interpenetration of the collective and individual levels I talked about, as the collective is actually manifested in the individual.

And since the biological collective, its life, evolution and evolutionary "archetype", is also manifested in the individual, the individual has a duty towards his biological collective.
Those who negate that biologically founded duty are indeed traitors.

Post je objavljen 12.04.2021. u 15:15 sati.