"MORAL WITHIN AN EXISTENTIAL FRAMEWORK"

*WARNING/DISCLAIMER* IS NOT COHESIVE/COMPREHENSIVE, POSSIBLY IS NOT ACCURATE AT TIMES, CONTAINS CONTRADICTIONS, HAS NOT BEEN 'THOUGHT THROUGH' TO SATISFACTION, TO A LARGE DEGREE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME *WARNING/DISCLAIMER*



CONCRETE REALITY VS. ABSTRACT REALITY

CONCRETE REALITY "HAS RHETORIC" (GRAVITY, ENTROPY, CAUSE-EFFECT, ETC.)

ABSTRACT REALITY "HAS NO RHETORIC" AND IS "PRIVATE," INFORMATION CANNOT BE SHARED EXCEPT ONLY THROUGH "CONCRETE REALITY," MORALITY DOES NOT EXIST IN "ABSTRACT REALITY" BECAUSE PAIN/SUFFERING DOES NOT EXIST

PEOPLE SEEM TO GET CONFUSED AS TO WHAT EXISTS IN CONCRETE REALITY VS. WHAT EXISTS IN ABSTRACT REALITY

CENSORSHIP

1. WHEN PEOPLE FEEL THAT "ABSTRACT REALITY" HAS THE "SAME RULES" AS "CONCRETE REALITY," THAT THINKING THINGS WILL AFFECT THINGS IN CONCRETE REALITY, CAUSING PAIN/SUFFERING

2. WHEN PEOPLE AREN'T BEING "IDEAL, IN THE LONG TERM" IN HOW THEY "DEAL WITH" "PEOPLE THINKING 'STRANGE'/VIOLENT THINGS" (IN THAT IT WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE, IN THE LONG-TERM, TO TEACH PEOPLE THAT CONCRETE REALITY IS DIFFERENT THAN ABSTRACT REALITY, THAT THEY CAN THINK WHATEVER THEY WANT TO, BUT THEY CANNOT DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO, IF THEY WANT TO FUNCTION WITHIN SOCIETY, RATHER THAN THAT THEY CAN'T THINK CERTAIN THINGS (FEELING THAT THEY MIGHT AT SOME POINT NOT BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH CONCRETE/ABSTRACT REALITY)

LIKE TELLING SOMEONE WHO IS EXERCISING BY "SWINGING THEIR ARMS AROUND" NOT TO DO THAT, BECAUSE IF THEY DO THAT IN A CROWDED AREA THEY MIGHT HURT PEOPLE

INSTEAD OF TELLING THEM THAT THEY SHOULDN'T DO THAT IN CROWDED AREAS

CONTEXT

[READ CONTEXT THINGS FROM PAPER]

GOALS

WHAT A RELEVANT PHYSICAL CONTEXT WANTS AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT. A PERSON'S DEFAULT GOAL IS TO 'GET AT' WHAT THEY HAVE ASSOCIATED WITH "[A WORD LIKE "PLEASURABLE"]."

THE UNIVERSE IS ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL, ITS DEFAULT AND ONLY GOAL IS TO CONTINUOUSLY ACTUATE ITS PHYSICAL LAWS, BASED ON WHAT I KNOW. 'EXCEPT ON THE SUBATOMIC LEVEL (CONFUSED ABOUT THAT).

INANIMATE OBJECTS ARE ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL.

CONSCIOUS CONTEXTS ARE NOT ALWAYS SUCCESSFUL.

MORALS

ALL THINGS ARE MORAL, THE DIFFERENCE B/W THINGS IS THEIR RELEVANT CONTEXT

ARE TREES AND PLANS "MORAL," ARGUABLY?

THEIR RELEVANT CONTEXT IS THEY PHYSICAL SPACE THEY OCCUPY. THEY REACT TO, ARGUABLY, TO THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF PARTS OF THEMSELVES, IN THAT THEY "MOVE TOWARDS" PERPETUATING THEIR LIFE AND GENES.

PEOPLE THOUGHT TO BE "EVIL"

THEIR CONTEXT IS A SMALL AREA OF THEIR BRAIN THAT IF "SATISFIED" RELEASES THINGS THAT PREVENT PAIN OR CREATE PLEASURE

SINCE THAT IS THEIR CONTEXT THEY'LL JUST "DO IT"

NORMAL PEOPLE

THEIR RELEVANT PHYSICAL CONTEXT IS SOMETHING LIKE THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILY, THEIR FRIENDS, AND, VAGUELY, THEIR COUNTRY

THEIR RELEVANT TEMPORAL CONTEXT IS, FOR THEIR COUNTRY, SOMETHING LIKE, VAGUELY, 10 YEARS, SOME OF THE TIME

IF SOMEONE HAS NO RELEVANT PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF A THING THEY ALSO DO NOT HAVE A RELEVANT TEMPORAL CONTEXT FOR IT

FOR THEMSELVES IT'S, VAGUELY, 2-5 DAYS

VEGANS WHO EAT ORGANIC FOOD AND DO OTHER SOCIALLY-AWARE THINGS

RELEVANT PHYSICAL CONTEXT EXTENDS TO ANIMALS, "EARTH." EXTENDS BEYOND, MAYBE, THEIR COUNTRY.

RELEVANT TEMPORAL CONTEXT FOR THE THINGS THEY HAVE PHYSICAL CONTEXTS ARE LARGER, FOR EXAMPLE THE COMPANY CALLED "SEVENTH GENERATION" SAY THEIR TEMPORAL CONTEXT FOR SOME THINGS IS 'SEVEN GENERATIONS'

THESE CONTEXTS ARE .000000001% OF 'THE ENTIRE' CONTEXT

[READ MARKED PAGE ON PAPER].

THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN HITLER AND A VEGAN IS LIKE THE DIFFERENT BETWEEN...

THESE CONTEXTS ARE BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS OPPOSED TO THE UNIVERSE'S (MORE CONCRETE) RHETORIC

WHY DO WE AVOID PAIN & STRIVE TO LIVE? BECAUSE OF 'EVOLUTION.' ONE CAN STRIVE FOR PAIN, BUT THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SOME BUILT-IN RESISTANCE, MAYBE.

WHY DOES A THING MOVE AT A CERTAIN RATE IN A VACUUM? BECAUSE OF 'GRAVITY.' ONE CAN STRIVE TO NOT MOVE AT A CERTAIN RATE IN A VACUUM, BUT THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SOME BUILT-IN RESISTANCE.

THE UNIVERSE IS CONCRETE REALITY, WHICH MEANS ITS RULES DON'T EXTEND TO ABSTRACT REALITY, BUT ABSTRACT REALITY HAS EVEN LESS RHETORIC THAN CONCRETE REALITY

THEREFORE ALL ACTIONS IN CONCRETE REALITY FOR THINGS WITH ACCESS TO ABSTRACT REALITY, ARE EQUALLY "ILLEGITIMATE" FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE UNIVERSE.

SARCASM

IF ONE OCCUPIES THEIR "ENTIRE" "ABSTRACT CONTEXT," BY REALIZING THAT ALL OF THEIR ACTIONS ARE BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS, ARE THEY ACTING ALL THE TIME IN A SARCASTIC MANNER, TO SOME DEGREE?

ABSTRACT SARCASM VS. CONCRETE SARCASM

ACTING WITHOUT "COMPLETE CONVICTION," WITH "SARCASM," AND "WITH COMPLETE CONVICTION" PRODUCES THE SAME RESULTS IN CONCRETE REALITY

SEEMS ATTRACTIVE TO ME TO ACT "WITH SARCASM," BECAUSE IT, TO ME, MEANS I HAVE A "LARGER CONTEXT," WHICH SEEMS TO ME A WAY TO, HOWEVER SARCASTICALLY, "KNOW WHAT TO DO" WITHOUT MAKING MORE ASSUMPTIONS THAN "NEEDED" (TO FUNCTION ON ANY LEVEL)

BENEFITS/DRAWBACKS OF HAVING "CONCRETE SARCASM"

[READ FROM PAPER, LAST PAGE]