G'day, my name is Bruce Robertson and this is Pirate Philosophy, the channel in which I describe The Pattern Paradigm, an original philosophy that is rigorous, logical and accurate; and one that I claim made far better sense of the world than any other philosophy. Welcome.
This video asks the question is morality a good ethical system.
So, perhaps we should start with some definitions:
Ethics: Philosophy regarding what one should do
Should: An expedient course of action.
Morality: That which describes what is good and bad.
Good: That which makes people happy
Bad: That which makes people sad
Happiness: That to which the brain aspires.
Happiness is the goal of the brain; it relates to the well-being of the physical body and the organs of the body including the brain itself. (This was discussed in a previous video). Happiness is not so much a goal to be achieved as it is a direction in which to proceed and it may not always be possible to proceed directly towards happiness, one may have to zigzag like a sailing boat tacking into the wind or one may even have to do a u turn in order to get around an obstacle. And in order to address the question of whether morality is a good ethical system, I shall first go over the process of decision making and how it can be optimized.
So, I shall start by looking at the decision-making algorithm introduced in the video PP13. 'What is the logic of decision making', and examine it in more detail and look at its implications.
So, here is the decision making algorithm:
Decision Making Algorithm
1. Assemble all possible actions for this decision
2. Select one possible action
3. Assemble all possible consequences of this action
4. Select one possible consequence.
Estimate the likelihood or probability that the consequence will occur.
Estimate the happiness (or unhappiness) that one might expect from that consequence in both the short term and the long-term. (Use some arbitrary units and put on a scale say from -10 ( extreme unhappiness) to +10 (maximum happiness).
Calculate the product of the probability by the estimated happiness to arrive at an overall expected value for the happiness of that consequence.
If There are more possible consequences loop back to ‘4’, else continue
Add all the Expected happinesses for each possible consequence to arrive at a combined expected happiness for this action and store this value alongside a description of the action
If there are more possible actions loop back to ‘2’, else continue
From the stored values of expected happiness find the one with the highest value.
Select the action that is associated with this value.
Execute the action.
I won't go over it in detail here for that you can look at the PP13 video just mentioned.
The idea behind putting it in the form of an algorithm is that the logic behind it is explicitly and clearly shown. The basic idea is that given any situation, where a decision has to be made, that all possible decisions are considered together with their associated actions and that for each possible decision and possible action, all the possible consequences are considered together with the probability that any particular consequence will occur; and then for each possible consequence, the happiness or sadness that this would likely entail for the person making the decision, is evaluated.
So that then for each possible decision that could be made, an estimate can be made of the expected happiness that this would bring, and this can be associated with each decision. Then when all possible decisions and all their possible consequences over an extended period of time and their associated happiness or sadness have been evaluated, one can then choose the decision that has the greatest expected happiness, or perhaps least expected sadness.
In this way, one has an algorithm for making the best possible decision in any given situation. This algorithm is descriptive; it is not so much how one 'should' make a decision, it is how people do make decisions. Though that said, in many circumstances, people might only consider one possible decision and evaluate only one possible consequence and even then only over the very short-term.
Nevertheless, making it explicit and realizing that this is how decisions are made, can be useful for making better decisions. And when I say it applies to any situation and any decision, I'm including the somewhat trivial decisions of deciding what to speak and what one says. (I will come back to this point later).
And it is not necessary for a person to be aware that this algorithm describes their decision making process. Some people might claim that they do not seek happiness for themselves; and also people might say this to other people because they want to portray themselves as selfless caring people, as they believe that by saying this, they will bring themselves greater happiness, or at least greater happiness than by saying that they actively seek happiness for themselves.
I want now to look at some of the practical implications of this algorithm and how it can be optimized. And this part is not so much descriptive, as it is looking at how to make good decisions and as such, it falls under the domain of what could be called 'ethics'.
So given this algorithm for decision making, how can one go about making good decisions, i.e. decisions that will bring one the greatest happiness?
Well first off, one needs to determine what it is that makes one happy. And this is not always obvious, for we are all different and one needs to work out for oneself what it is that makes one happy and also perhaps, what makes one sad. In order to do this, one needs to explore and try different things and then determine how that makes one feel.
Secondly, one needs an accurate model of the world so that one can imagine the possible consequences of decisions and actions with reasonable accuracy. So in order to do this, one needs to learn about the world one lives in, including the culture, the society, the laws, the justice system and perhaps most importantly, how one can interact with these things, to achieve happiness.
Thirdly, one needs the time to think about these things, for the decision making algorithm is fairly complex and the brain only works at a finite speed and so requires time to work through the possible decisions, the possible consequences and the expected happiness that may result from those decisions. And it is particularly important to consider the long-term consequences of decisions and actions. And man is perhaps unique among animals in having a good idea of life-expectancy and hence how far into the future to plan ahead. And as such it may be expedient to defer immediate pleasure for greater pleasure and happiness in the future.
Man is also a social animal; In general, people need to interact effectively with other people in order to thrive. To this end, the consequences of one's decisions on other people are important. Perhaps it should also be noted here that when people do things for other people, it is not so much as an end in itself; for when people do things for other people, they believe that ultimately this will bring happiness to themselves. So, it is important when making decisions to take into account how one's decisions will impact upon other people and how their response will impact on one's own happiness. And this is not easy to do, especially when one is finding one's own place in the world. So, in this regard, it is expedient to learn from other people and if one is not sure of the consequences, to be guided by people with more experience.
And this is where what could be called 'morals' come in; they are a guide to acceptable social behavior. That said, morals are not absolutes for what is good and bad, they are only guidelines. What is 'good' are decisions and actions that bring one happiness, especially in the long-term; and conversely what is 'bad' is what brings one unhappiness in the long-term. And perhaps it is important to realize that any person who insists that one should adopt to a particular course of action because it is 'moral' or 'good', are only saying this as they believe that it will maximize their own personal happiness. (For as mentioned earlier, deciding to say something is a decision that follows the decision making algorithm.)
So in order to make effective decisions for oneself, one needs to realize that morals are guidelines and are not absolute. The implication of morality is that if its tenets are transgressed, then one will be ostracized by society; in this way, they are quite different from the laws of the land, which have quite different consequences if transgressed.
However, morality is a popular ethical system of the Western world and it is primarily about persuading people to do what is best for other people, even if it is to the detriment of their own happiness. And while this may seem reasonable, it makes no attempt to encourage people to examine the consequences, especially the long term consequences, of their decisions and associated actions.
The consequences of transgressing morals are typically vague and implied rather than clear and explicit. The implications for the consequences of transgressing morals are little more than ostracism from society. Whereas the consequences considered within the decision making algorithm are necessarily clear, explicit and inescapable. And as such, should a person reject the morality system of their society, which many do, then they will make decisions based only upon what they want to achieve in the short-term without considering the long-term consequences; to the ultimate detriment of their own long-term happiness. This is a major failing for morality as an ethical system.
Also conversely, if people meekly follow the proscribed morals of their society, they may well find that the achievement of their long-term happiness is compromised and they find themselves in a state of depression. (Incidentally it is estimated that some 15% of people experience some form of depression in their lives and that at any one time, about 5% of people are in a state of depression.) I am not saying that all depression is caused through simply following the morals of society, rather than thinking for themselves, and how they can achieve their own personal long-term happiness, I am only saying that this may be the cause of some cases of depression.
The primary function of the brain is as a decision making device. That is what it does. That is why it evolved. And that is why animals have brains; they make decisions every day, every second. That is what the function of the brain is.
So it follows that if the brain is restricted from making effective decisions to maximize its happiness, then it is not fulfilling its primary purpose. This is in the same way that a bird kept in a cage that is unable to fly is not fulfilling its primary function of being able to fly. (And incidentally this is why I use a picture of a flying Seagull as the icon for this channel.)
So in conclusion, I claim that morality is a poor ethical system; not least because it tries to restrict people in their decision making. One needs to realize that morals are no more than guidelines and are not effective as a foundation for an ethical system. I also claim that a far better guide to what one 'should' do in one's life is to try to make good decisions based upon the algorithm presented at the start of this video. And also to optimize its use by working out for oneself what makes one happy, developing an accurate model of the world and giving oneself the time to think about these things.
Well, that is all I have for you today. I hope you have enjoyed this video and if you have any comments or questions, please leave them in the section below and if you would like to continue this journey with me, please subscribe to my channel, give the video a thumbs up and if you want, ring the bell.
Thank you.
Comentarios