Ethics in the future should be values-based

Ethics

in the future

should be

values-based

Triadic Philosophy

substitutes Values

for Aristotle's binary

virtues

¶

Aristotle set the stage

for ethics discussion 

But Aristotle bases

his ethics on

character and

virtue rather than will 

Now Western thought

has a "value system" 

based not on will

but on honor 

Aristotle's

overarching virtue

Values and will

are one 

Values create history

and culture 

Values transcend

character 

Values transcend

virtue 

Values are

the desires of the heart

 Jesus understands

all of this 

Aristotle appears

not to

Only the will

is capable of desire

Values are desires 

They are not

characteristics

They are motivations

Their power is

realized as they

become conscious

and operative

All of us operate

on values 

that represent

what we most honor

what we give

the most credence to

what moves us

Search the terms

value and virtue 

in the text

of Aristotle's "Ethics" 

You will find

virtue and character 

For Aristotle

value is merely

a word 

denoting relative

advantage

in relationships

The Slow as Molasses Press

Aristotle Jousts with The Bard

Aristotle linked

ethics to virtues

But virtues cut

both ways and

lead to binary

thinking

¶

We owe the

destruction

of virtue-based

ethics

to the noble

Bard

"Falstaff: Can honor set-to a leg? no: or an arm? no: or take away the grief of a wound? no. Honor hath no skill in surgery then? no. What is honor? a word. What is that word, honor? air. A trim reckoning!--Who hath it? he that died o' Wednesday. Doth he feel it? no. Doth be hear it? no. Is it insensible, then? yea, to the dead. But will it not live with the living? no. Why? detraction will not suffer it. Therefore I'll none of it: honor is a mere scutcheon:--and so ends my catechism. 
(Henry IV Part One V, I)"

The Slow as Molasses Press

We need a triad that makes sense for now

We need a triad

that  makes

sense for now

That triad is

Reality

Ethics

Aesthetics

We'll

explain

Ω

Not either-or

We cannot progress individually or planetarily without moving past binary thinking. Binary thinking stops at two. It contains little or or no thought about ethics. It clings to one side of something until the other side collapses and then it declares victory. Until the other side gets up the strength to to fight some more. This is the stuff of fiction and the sad result of fact. It is like a disease. It eats away at the fabric of hope.

If either-or is the only answer, thinking is merely a matter of remembering what you believe. But if all you believe is that you must strike out and if the result is harm,  you are engaged in a closed loop, based on either-or.

Either do this or do that. Never a third option. Or another way. Or an alternative. Whether we are talking of an individual or a group, things tend to come down to either-or.

There is one big  reason the binary way fails. It fails because preventing harm (ethics) is not even on the table. 

Triadic thinking is an automatic brake on the harmful binary mode.

It interposes ethics between the matter at hand and the action that ensues. It subjects deeds to the criteria of truth and beauty. It is a wake-up call. A mindfulness nudge. It is a call to remember binary history when ethics was largely ignored and misunderstood. It is a call to the unprecedented in today's iffy world.


The Slow as Molasses Press

When you forgive Abba will forgive you.

When you forgive Abba will forgive you. 

This is his single covenantal rule. 

When you forgive the wrongs of everyone, 

Abba forgives the wrongs you've done. 

Practice reciprocal forgiveness daily. 

You will see. 

What's done is done.

 Walk on. 

Walk right. 

Walk free

The Slow as Molasses Press

Three sees life as continuous

The Slow as Molasses Press

Excerpt from Triadic Primer

For spiritual background see Abba's Way and  The Tao of Mark  

For a companion to this Primer see  Triadic Philosophy

To give a copy of this book to a friend visit Triadic Primer at Kinde

¶

Three sees

life as

continuous

¶

Three enables

conflict but allows a

move past it

Three gives us

freedom to choose

a better way -

like non-violence

instead of adding

to harm done

¶

Some Past Triads

Father

Son

Holy Ghost

(Christianity)

Thesis

Antithesis

Synthesis

(Hegel, Marx)

Id

Ego

Superego

(Freud)

While these are

not utterly frozen

in the past

they are not exactly

poised to advance

history today

The number three holds one and two

The Slow as Molasses Press

Excerpt from Triadic Primer

For spiritual background see Abba's Way and  The Tao of Mark  

For a companion to this Primer see  Triadic Philosophy

To give a copy of this book to a friend visit Triadic Primer at Kinde

¶

The number

three holds

one and two

Three also

nests

infinity

Three goes past

either-or

Binary thinking

stops at two

Three grasps

reality

Three sees that

nothing is final

Three admits

fallibility

Look at things in threes

The Slow as Molasses Press

Looking at things in threes means that any train of thought you have does not need to stop at two. Thought starts with a sign that rises up in your mind, generally related to a sense or a feeling. Remember that light that goes on in old comics, to signify a thought?

If you just have that feeling and the next thought-step is action, you are giving up the most precious quality we people possess.

Freedom. The freedom to choose among alternatives. How can you claim to have freedom with only a two-step thought process? You can't.  

For example:

You feel dizzy as you are walking from bed to bath in the middle of the night. A light goes on in your head, but you keep on walking. Without considering! And you end up taking a serious fall.   

Freedom has no role in that little story. We call such results accidents. But they are really the product of not looking at things in threes. All triadic considerations involve a crucial second step before acting.

What is this second thing that should be interposed between the dizziness and the fall? It is called an INDEX. It's an interlude that could take just a fraction of a second. Or a much longer time, depending. It is a list of possible choices.

Dizzy. INDEX: Should I ask what's going on? Should I ask if it's safe to continue? Should I ask what can I do now?  Should I call my sweetheart from her slumber? Should I stop? Each question points to a choice. The very existence of choices suggests what I believe is the main, perhaps the only, real freedom we have. The freedom to select among alternatives. The freedom to consider the value of any particular act.

The person who continues and falls never has that choice. He never took time to think. He was literally thought-less. He stopped at two. The next thing he knew he was laying on the floor.

How many even think of looking at things in threes? How many have thought of an INDEX? How many think that truth and beauty should influence all human actions?

The answer is: More than you may think. And: Not enough.

For spiritual background see Abba's Way and  The Tao of Mark  

For a companion to this Primer see  Triadic Philosophy

To give a copy of this book to a friend visit Triadic Primer