The foundations of ethics

Ethical knowledge is knowledge about the goods and evils of the mind.

Fundamental goods and evils

To be in good health, to perceive well, to be moved well, to imagine well, to think well, to want well, to act well, and all that constitutes a good life of a mind, are all fundamental goods for all minds. Similarly, to be in bad health, to perceive badly, to be moved badly, to imagine badly, to think badly, to want badly, to act badly, and all that constitutes a bad life of a mind, are all fundamental evils for all minds. Fundamental goods make a wise, just and happy life. Fundamental evils make a senseless, unjust and unhappy life. To speak well, to pay attention well, to acquire good habits, to remember well, to meditate well... are fundamental goods. Speaking well and acquiring good habits are ways of acting well, paying attention well, a way of perceiving well, remembering well, thinking well and meditating well ways of imagining well... Apart from the health of the body or the lack of it, fundamental goods and evils are always psychic, because if there were neither mind nor life, there would be neither good nor evil. 

Fundamental goods are inseparable. They are like the spokes of the same wheel, the wheel of wisdom, or the wheel of Dharma. It is necessary to perceive well to be moved well, to be moved well to think well, to think well to want well, to want well to act well, and to act well to perceive well...

Derived goods are means to achieve fundamental goods. Derived evils are causes of fundamental evils. Fundamental goods and evils are mutually exclusive, but derived goods and evils are not, because a means to achieve a fundamental good may at the same time be a cause of a fundamental evil.

Goods can be indispensable or only desirable. Indispensable goods can be more or less indispensable, the same for desirable goods. Evils can be intolerable or just undesirable. Intolerable evils can be more or less intolerable, the same for undesirable evils.

From a dream of wisdom to wisdom

How do we know if goods and evils are goods or evils? How to observe it? We know the derived goods and evils from the causes of fundamental goods and evils. We know the fundamental goods and evils from the ideals of wisdom, justice and happiness.

To know the derived goods and evils, one must know the fundamental goods and evils. To know the fundamental goods and evils, one must know wisdom, justice and happiness. But knowledge about wisdom, justice and happiness is the highest ethical knowledge. It seems that a beginner cannot even begin to develop his ethical knowledge, since he would have to have the highest knowledge from the first steps.

True knowledge about wisdom, justice and happiness only comes at the end, if one has truly become wise and just. In the beginning we only have examples, dreams, prejudices, fantasies, errors of judgement, but that is enough to begin with, because we learn by experience to correct our errors and to transform our dreams into really good ideals which are achievable. The learning of ethical knowledge transforms a dream of wisdom into real knowledge about wisdom. All sciences are developed by moving from dreams of science to real science. Above all, we must not give up the dream because we need it to learn.

A good will is to will the good

A mind must not destroy himself, he must persevere in his being, he must live for the mind. We must work to have good living conditions. If we do not make efforts, we necessarily live rather badly. 

The will to persevere in one's being is a necessary condition of good will, but it is not sufficient. The mind must live for the good of the mind, not only for the mind to live. Organized crime lives to continue living and it is not a good of the mind. To live well, we have to want to live well. One cannot live well without having a good will. The mind must want the good of the mind. A good will is necessarily to will the good, to want to do it as much as one can. If a mind does not want his own good or that of others, he is misusing his will. It only remains for him to destroy himself, or to destroy others.

To want well, we have to decide well and stick to our good decisions. To make a good decision, we must evaluate the consequences for which we are responsible, the foreseeable goods and evils that affect others or ourselves and which result from our decisions. In the simplest cases these consequences are all good or all bad. If they are all bad, the decision must be refused. If they are all good and if at least one of them is an indispensable good, the decision must be accepted. If they are only desirable, it is not necessary, only desirable, to accept the decision. One cannot always decide in favor of what is desirable, because desirable goods are often mutually exclusive. If a decision has as foreseeable consequences an indispensable good and an only undesirable evil, it must be accepted. Similarly, a merely desirable good is not enough to justify a decision in favor of an intolerable evil. If a decision has as consequences an indispensable good and an intolerable evil, or an only desirable good and an only undesirable evil, we need a balanced and reasoned evaluation of all the consequences for which we are responsible in order to decide well.

Since a good will is good, we must want the good will to continue when we want the good. It is the circle of the perpetuation of the life of the mind. To want the good, to perceive, imagine, think, feel and act for the good is to live for the good. The good of the mind is to live for the good. For a mind, to live well is to live for the good.

The love of the good is desire, knowledge and action. To love the good is to want it, and to perceive, imagine, think, feel and act to achieve it, as far as possible. To love the good is to live for the good. The good of the mind is to love the good. A mind is fulfilled by loving the good, by desire, knowledge and action.

We can make decisions about how we make decisions. A mind can exercise his will on his way of exercising his will. We can decide to adopt principles that determine the good we must seek. We thus decide to always decide in accordance with the principles that we have adopted. We can decide to always make our decisions by wanting the good.

An action motivated by good will is good, even if it misses its goal, because a good will is good. Conversely, an action which is not motivated by good will is not a good, even if it has beneficial consequences, because the absence of good will is an evil. Intentions are essential for evaluating actions, because a good will is the basic condition for a good life, but it does not mean that we can ignore the consequences: we have a duty to foresee the consequences of our actions, as much as is possible and adapted to the situation.

A remark on circular definitions : principles such as "matter is what interacts with matter", "a natural number is either zero or the successor of a natural number" and "the good of the mind is that the mind lives for the good" are not at fault. They determine the meaning of fundamental concepts. Formally we translate them by axioms. Informally, we can say that they are true by definition, or that they define the fundamental concepts. Circular definitions are forbidden only for derived concepts, defined from basic concepts. But they are not forbidden for fundamental concepts, because axioms can be considered as implicit definitions of fundamental concepts.

Ethical knowledge is an indispensable fundamental good

The misuse of thought and will causes much suffering. The right use of thought and will alleviates much suffering. Believing that we know good and evil well when we know them badly causes us to do a lot of harm and condemns us to misfortune. We have a duty to know well the good. Like goodwill, ethical knowledge is a fundamental and indispensable good. It is a necessary condition for all fundamental goods, because one needs it to decide well and thus to exercise one's good will.

Ethical knowledge is knowledge about goods and evils. Metaethical knowledge is knowledge about ethical knowledge. But ethical knowledge is a fundamental good. So metaethical knowledge is ethical knowledge. It is not a knowledge superior or external to ethics, but only a part of ethics. Metaethics is the self-awareness of ethics.

The unity of reason and passions

To be well moved to live well and think well

To be well moved is to have emotions that help us adapt to reality in order to live well. Being well moved is not necessarily feeling good. "For everything there is a season (...) a time to weep and a time to laugh." (Ecclesiastes 3) Suffering can be a way to be well moved, because it is a way of adapting to an evil. But it would be foolish to conclude from this that suffering is a good that must be willed, because in order to will suffering one must will the evil that causes suffering.

Emotions signal what is important. They teach us what to look for, when they are pleasant, and what to avoid, when they are not. Emotional intelligence is the main form of intelligence. Without emotions we would never be able to live well, or even to live at all. When emotional intelligence is damaged by neurological or psychic disorders, we lose our ability to live well, we no longer even know how to make good use of our thoughts (Damasio 1994).

We sometimes oppose reason to passions, pathos, and we believe we are elevating the first while despising the second. But we do not know then that it is naturally impossible to make good use of one's reason without the passions. We sometimes oppose noble passions to sad passions, joy, pride, serenity on the one hand, anger, sadness, fear, disgust, shame on the other hand, and we believe to rise by honoring the former and despising the latter. But that's forgetting that we also need sad passions to live well. To never be afraid is not courage but unconsciousness, because fear warns of danger. It is always foolish to go against nature, to want what is naturally impossible. Living well without sad passions is not naturally possible.

Emotions give us a moral sensitivity, as if we had a detector capable of signaling the presence of good and evil. We could conclude that we don't need reason to live well, that emotions are enough. One can be very intelligent simply by letting oneself be guided by one's emotions. So do we really need to reason to live well?

Pleasures are indicators of a good life. But a good life is not reduced to the search for pleasures. Following the pleasure of the moment is not good will. Emotions enlighten us but they can also blind us. A particular emotion only shows one aspect of the situation. If it is strong, it can prevent having a balanced overview and lead us to a biased, intolerant and unfair decision. Emotions are not opposed to reason like enemies, because they show us how to live well, but like particular interests which sometimes oppose the common interest. An emotion that is too weak prevents us from realizing what is important. Too strong an emotion stifles other emotions and blinds us too. For emotions to help us live, we need the golden middle way, not too much, not too little (Aristotle, Nicomachean ethics). Emotions are not against reason, but the emotional imbalance is. Too strong an emotion prevents us from having a balanced judgment. Emotional balance is a necessary condition of reason.

To think well to be well moved

We need emotional balance to live well, but emotions do not obey the orders of the will. How then can we want to be moved as we must be moved? The triggering of emotions is not directly under the control of the will, but the emotions are not all powerful against the will. One can voluntarily control the expression of emotions, retain or release them. We can also voluntarily control the conditions, external and internal, which trigger them. In particular, emotions depend on the ways of interpreting reality. 

The Buddha (the awakened one):

"He insulted me, he beat me, he defeated me, he stole me". Do they attach themselves to these reproaches: there is no appeasement for their hatred.

"He insulted me, he beat me, he defeated me, he stole me". Do they not attach themselves to these reproaches: appeasement for their hatred.

Certainly, in this world never hatred appeases hatred, but absence of hatred does : eternal law.

(Dhammapada 3-5)

The Buddha awakened when he understood that he was the creator of his interpretation of reality, like a dreamer who wakes up realizing that he has dreamed.

Emotions depend on the interpretation of reality, and therefore on thoughts and principles. We give ourselves schemas, systems of assumptions or principles, which determine our ways of perceiving, how we anticipate the consequences of our actions and how we make our decisions. We can use our thought to modify our emotional reactions by changing our interpretations. By voluntarily controlling our interpretations, we can gain mastery over our emotions. Through thought, self-consciousness is powerful enough to appease or extinguish the fire of emotions. So we can exercise our good will to learn to be well moved.

We need good schemas to adapt to reality. As long as we do not have a schema, we do not know how to interpret what we perceive. But the schemas that we have internalized are not always good. Bad schemas prevent one from adapting to reality, they blind, they weaken, they cause suffering, they make the same mistakes repeat over and over again, they lock up in seemingly hopeless situations, they afflict and condemn. Good schemas reveal the possibilities that reality offers us, they enlighten, they make strong, they alleviate suffering, they show how to learn the lessons of experience, they give the power to avoid or overcome obstacles, they rejoice and give reasons to hope. The schemas method, identify maladaptive schemas and modify or replace them with better ones, is applied in many fields, psychotherapy (Jeffrey Young 2003, Jean Cottraux 2001 ...), sexual freedom, self-rehabilitation of ex-convicts (Shadd Maruna 2008) ... It can be applied in all areas where human intelligence is exercised, because it invites us to make full use of the powers of intelligence. The schemas method of is based on the capacity of the mind to form himself, to program himself, by making decisions. We are not doomed to suffer the effects of bad schemas. Choosing good principles comes down to giving oneself good programs, in order to perceive well, to think well, to be well moved, to act well and live well.

There is a virtuous circle of emotions and thoughts: emotional balance promotes the development of balanced thinking that strengthens emotional balance. Conversely, there is a vicious circle of emotional imbalance. Emotional imbalance leads to imbalanced thinking which amplifies emotional imbalance. We must seek the unity of reason and passions: to think well with good principles in order to live well. Claiming to reason to oppose the passions is unreasonable.

The desire for wisdom

It is always a mistake to want evil. It is also a mistake to desire what is naturally impossible. When the satisfaction of a desire is naturally impossible, one suffers from frustration. When the satisfaction of a desire is an evil, one suffers the consequences of the renunciation of reason. In both cases the unity of reason and passions has not been realized. When a desire cannot or should not be satisfied, one can and must extinguish the suffering by renunciation. This is the third noble truth of the Buddha.

A path of wisdom is not a renunciation of all desires - no wisdom without a desire for wisdom, no good life without a desire to live - but it is not a path of dissatisfaction, because a desire for wisdom is not doomed to frustration. A true desire for true wisdom is the exact opposite of the torment of Tantalus (Homer, Odysseus, XI): it suffices to bend down for clear water to appear, because a true desire for true wisdom is already a true wisdom.

A mind must learn to be what it must be. When he learns to be virtuous, a mind is not yet what he must be, because he must learn it, but in another way he is already what he must be, because he must learn, because the learning phase must be. Learning to be virtuous is already starting to be virtuous, because wanting the good is good. The desire for wisdom is the beginning of wisdom. When we love the good, we love what is already there, not just a good that we desire without having it, because the love of the good is the good. “Whoever drinks this water will never be thirsty again because it is a source from which life springs endlessly." (John 4, 14)

The good of a mind is to live for the good of all minds

We cannot do the good of others against their will because we cannot make their decisions for them. Their good is that they have a good will and that they exercise it freely. Since we do not have the duty to do what we cannot do, we could conclude that we never have the duty to do the good of others, that we should only take care of our own good. Can a selfish mind, who lives only for his own good, without worrying about the good of other minds, live well?

We cannot do the good of others for them, but we can give them the means to do it, or on the contrary, prevent them from living a good life. A selfish mind renounces his social nature. He can be good for other minds but he gives up this good. He is a withering mind. A mind lives well by being good for himself and his surroundings. But he can also be good for everyone, because the fruits of reason are universal. When a mind knows reason, he knows at the same time what is good for him and what is good for everyone else. By revealing reason, a mind proves to himself, and to everyone else, that he can be good for all minds, because we can all benefit from the fruits of reason. By refusing to be good for others, a selfish mind renounces at the same time to be really good for himself, because he deprives himself of the power of reason. We learn at the same time to be good for ourselves and to be good for others. If we do not know how to be good for others, we do not know how to be good for ourselves.

"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in any other person, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means" (Kant, 1785). To consider a mind only as a means is to deliberately ignore his good. To really consider him as an end, we have to want his good. The good of all minds must be an end for all minds. A mind lives a good life when he lives for the good of all minds, his own and that of all others. The good of a mind cannot be separated from the good of all minds. The good life, the good that minds should seek, is the good life of a community in which everyone strives to live for the good of all others.

To love a mind is to live for his or her good. Reason prescribes to live for the good of all minds, therefore to love them. « You shall love your neighbor as yourself » (Leviticus 19, 18) is a rationalist principle. If human beings do not want to help each other, reason can not be among them. Hatred drives us mad because it is contrary to reason, which prescribes us to always want the good of all minds. If we want to keep reason, we must "love our enemies" (Matthew 5, 44). We must forgive because hatred prevents us from wanting the good, and therefore from living a good life. Reason asks us to love all minds, but love cannot be commanded. Emotions are not directly under the control of the will. We do not decide to be moved. We do not choose to love. Loving our enemies may seem impossible or absurd. The obligation to love one's enemies is not the obligation never to hate. Hatred reactions are natural. They can help to assess a situation and adapt. But we must not allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by anger and hatred, we must overcome them. Otherwise they drive us crazy. The obligation to love one's enemies is to never stop at the hatred they inspire in us, to always consider them as ends, to want their good and the end of hatred. One can think well in order to be moved well. One can extinguish the fire of one's hatred through thought. The enemy who must be overcome is not the other but the hatred of the other. Beat it, like in the song by Michael Jackson.

The greatest science is to know the most important, the most vital, the indispensable. Science is knowing causes and ends. What is most vital? What is its cause? What is its end?

Love to love (Donna Summer)

The most vital? Love. Its cause ? Love. Its end? Love.

So there is no greater theorem than “Love to love”.