about this areaThe Overview area contains articles and essays that address the fundamental characteristics and underpinnings of Human Capital Sustainability (HCS).
These articles and essays are contributed by members of the HCS editorial team. To respond to the ideas presented in an article, click the Respond link at the bottom of that article. |
ethics and physicsPaul Kordis, September 2008
Between these two ideas arises the notion of volition and its effect. That is, when we choose to do something it changes the universe, if only just a little bit. In one sense this makes us gods. Our actions change an otherwise predictable universe. Some would argue that in a predictable universe, where everything is merely a matter of particles banging together, our actions would merely be a predictably random result, if one can excuse the oxymoron, devoid of any true volition. However, this would mean that the hypothesis regarding the random collision of particles was itself merely a matter of random collisions of particles and, by virtue of this fact, would have no intrinsic validity, either. Therefore, if we accept the notion of volition, of choice, then we must perforce accept that whenever we choose to do something the universe changes. This godlike ability carries with it a rather important ethical aspect. That is, if we are to choose to change the universe on a routine basis, then we most probably should do so wisely. But if the universe is difficult to predict due to the principle of uncertainty, how can we wisely choose? Finding the solution to this problem is most likely a principle reason for the evolution of our big brains – predicting the future ramifications of certain actions. And over the eons we have collectively gathered our knowledge (memes) and wisdom (phemes) in order to make choices that have the greatest benefit to humanity and the world in which we live. That is, to make choices which have the most profound and lasting benefit for all concerned. These common human guidelines and principles are found in most of the world’s great religions and functional secular societies. Most people understand them almost intuitively and generally agree with them in principle. The problem arises when we are called to consistently act in accordance with them. Although there are many causes, systemic and otherwise, which can be attributed to our ignorance of or reluctance to act in accordance with universal ethical values, one of the most outstanding and apparent causes is the lack of an ethical context in contemporary decision making. To address this problem one can view the progression of human decision making and action taking in the following way:
What, then, are these universal ethical principles? Graves (1970), Kohlberg (1981), Piaget (1947), Loevinger (1976), Lynch and Kordis (1988; 1990), Erickson (1994), Maslow (1998), Korten (2006) and many others have forwarded theories suggesting that human ethics and values have a developmental nature, that is, they change over time based on experience and maturity. But while these theories are both powerful and true, there are also a set of core ethical principles that seem to emerge sometime in adulthood and are common across most value systems, ideologies, and religions (Axworthy, 2008; Lama, 1999; Traer & Stelmach, 2008). A short list of these principles would include the following:
And, of course, one can observe considerable overlap among them. In addition, there is certainly a healthy and vigorous debate, at the very least since the time of Plato and Socrates, regarding the viability of any set of universal values, and many have chosen to parse the possibilities into teleological and deontological groups, caring and self-interest, universal and particular-relative, etc. (Brady, 1996). But the key idea is that most people most of the time would say that supporting the above list of principles is important. And while it's true that people don't always walk the talk, and different situations may call for different behaviors and choices, it's still important for people to remember their espoused principles, if only to bring their choices and behavior into a closer alignment with their beliefs.
As a result of ignoring spiritual capital, both natural and human capital are rapidly being depleted and a series of social, environmental, economic, and political disasters loom on the horizon. To correct this egregious mistake the influence of spiritual, ethical, and philosophical considerations must be renewed as a guide for any restorative measures. Chief among these are universal human ethics. Therefore, to truly preserve the physical world and people's quality of life within it the realm of spiritual, ethical, and philosophical influence must be empowered and invoked as the prime directive for human activity. references
Brady, F. N. (Ed.). (1996). Ethical universals in international business. New York: Springer-Verlag. Erikson, E. (1994). Identity and the life cycle. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. Graves, C. W. (1970). Levels of existence: An open system of values. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Fall, 1970. Kohlberg, L. (1981). The philosophy of moral development: Essays on moral development (Vol. 1). New York: Harper & Row. Korten, D. C. (2006). The great turning: From empire to earth community. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Lama, D. (1999). Ethics for the new millennium. New York: Riverhead Books. Loevinger, J., & Blasi, A. (1976). Ego development: Conceptions and theories. New York: Jossey-Bass, Inc. Lynch, D., & Kordis, P. L. (1988). Strategy of the dolphin: Scoring a win in a chaotic world. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc. Lynch, D., & Kordis, P. L. (1990). Code of the monarch. Fort Collins: Brain Technologies Corporation. Maslow, A. H. (1998). Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Piaget, J. (1947). La psychologie de l'intelligence. Paris: Armand Colin. Traer, R., & Stelmach, H. (2008). Doing ethics in a diverse world. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Respond to this article. Next article: Wave Theory |
founderPaul L. Kordis, PhD advisorsJames H. Banning, PhD Gary Geroy, PhD Ed Goodman, P.E., MSCE Bruce Hall, PhD M.L. Johnson, EdD, PhD David T. Moran, PhD Beverly Title, PhD
|
