Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
December 09, 2009 | Updated Friday, October 29, 2010
This is Project Humanbeingsfirst's response to the moral reflections of an ordinary mortal using the nom de plume 'lwtc247' on the web, in “The importance and benefits of self honesty” where he mused:
'When you stand before God to be judged, do you really think at that time you will be able to enter a debate with God about your behavior? Playing with or bending some words to cover-up or justify your bad deeds? Perhaps a little “white lie” here and there? Do you really think you can deceive God?'
This problem was solved by Nietzsche a long time ago! Where have you been?
There used to be a prominent T-Shirt worn around campus when I was an undergrad, it said in bold:
God is Dead -- Nietzsche
(of course I am not going to provide you the punch-line that was printed in very fine letters just underneath that)
More pertinently however, morality and intellect are two separate things. It is mixing them where people become misled!
Intellect cannot confer upon morality any view other than subjective, and hence relative and arbitrary. The following statement from an 'uber intellect' is a good evidence of this:
“Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes, that a name, a phrases, a standard has meaning only when associated with the considerations which give birth to nomenclature. To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic strait-jacket, we must reply that all concepts are relative.” -- Justice Vinson, U.S. Supreme Court, 1951 AD
However, the following algorithm is not just evidence of what I say, but its outright proof. This proof is furnished by the 'uber uber' atheist of the 20th century, i.e., the most fanatical God is Dead exponent, Mr. Bertrand Russell. I can't recall the exact chapter and verse, but it goes something like this.
Bertrand Russell's morality synthesis exclusively from the intellect:
~'Maximize individual happiness (pleasures) while minimizing social conflict (not hitting on another's spouse) to optimize the overall happiness of the people composing the social unit who agree to live by the set of laws which implement this operations-research calculus.' -- Bertrand Russell also noted some caveats for protection of minors and those unable to make choices so that one could not maximize one's pleasures upon them without some institutional safeguards.
Using that highly intellectual morality equation – and I will confess that I have not encountered a more profound synthesis of morality and law anywhere, and which, on the surface at least, appears rather full of brilliance and minimalism – it would be perfectly acceptable, for instance, to spread Black-death every other generation for population control among other 'untermensch' societies. Or, to create a draconian police-state by re-defining what individual happiness might mean, and conditioning the people to get used to it. As Goethe had observed, “none are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free”. In such a society, the people could be kept quite content in their voluntary servitude thus leaving no social conflict whatsoever – and thus culminating in a perfectly stable and rational society.
In this highly intellectual system, also called Secular Humanism, enslaving the populace by a bunch of wily 'ubermensch' who have craftily chosen not to be constrained in the “semantic strait-jacket” alluded to by Judge Vinson quoted above and who accept “that all concepts are relative”, that state of affairs would be a perfectly moral outcome. It certainly satisfies Bertrand Russell's intellect-derived morality calculus. And if someone thinks I am making all this up, Bertrand Russell himself concluded in his epiphany to 'uber' intellectual morality, in his 1952 book “Impact of Science on Society”, that a Scientific Society, meaning one built on intellect – as obviously imbeciles can't do high-tech science – will automatically culminate in “World government [which] could only be kept in being by force”.
We can brazenly observe this exercise of the 'uber' intellect for instance, not just in the world government under construction which of course no one believes is happening, but in the Talmud among its very moral followers which no one can ever deny unless their lips are moving in chutzpatic confabulations. The Ten Commandments of Moses are intellectually particularized from their universal moral form, by adding an implied “Jew” at the end. Thus, as has been amply exposed by many recovering Jews themselves, “Thou Shall Not Kill” is read by many an adherent Talmudic Rabbi as: “Thou Shall Not Kill [a Jew; killing goy is OK]”.
And as evidence that this “hegelian mind fck” isn't just some historical baggage which happened in the Dark Ages with no bearing to modernity, here is the latest version of the Law Book of Israel: 'The King's Torah': http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/the-complete-guide-to-killing-non-jews.html!
For additional examples of this ongoing “hegelian mind fck”, please see: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/11/genesis-to-genocide-golem-not-jewish.html
Fundamentally, the problems outlined by lwtc247 have been long solved philosophically, i.e., by using the intellect. Here is a short passage from Leo Strauss which shows just how remarkably it is has been solved:
'Political Zionism has repeatedly characterized itself as the will to normalize the existence of the Jewish people, to normalize the Jewish people. By this self-definition it has exposed itself to a grave misunderstanding, namely, the misunderstanding that the will to normality was the first word of political Zionism; the most effective criticism of political Zionism rests on this misunderstanding. In truth, the presupposition of the Zionist will to normalization, that is, of the Zionist negation of galut [exile], is the conviction that "the power of religion has been broken". Because the break with religion has been resolutely effected by many individual Jews, and only because of this reason, it is possible for these individuals to raise the question on behalf of their people, how the people is to live from now on. Not that they prostrate themselves before the idol of normality; on the contrary: they no longer see any reason for the lack of normality. And this is decisive: in the age of atheism, the Jewish people can no longer base its existence on God but only on itself alone, on its labor, on its land, and on its state. ...' -- page 202, Leo Strauss, The Early Writings 1921-1932
See its fuller exposition at the link below, but here is the core essence of that morality:
'In simple language which peels off the philosophical-gibberish of “will to normality” and such, straightforwardly speaking: god gave the Jews the land grants, anointed them as the 'chosen peoples', and then Nietzsche killed god, and now it's up to the Jewish people who “can no longer base its existence on God but only on itself alone, on its labor, on its land, and on its state”, in order to construct their own future “because the break with religion has been resolutely effected by many individual Jews” who must now lead their flock!!!' -- http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/02/letterto-dalitvoice-which-god.html
See how wonderful a solution it is mes amis? I hope no one is too sarcasm impaired here.
Not to be outdone by atheists in defining their own super-morality with their uber-intellect, god's chosen theists can even outdo that with learned confabulations – become god themselves:
'... The point is that a Jew has strength, ability and power to create the desire within G-d to accept and become King over the entire creation.
It's understood, that the existence of the entire creation, in truth, is brought about by the Jew's coronation of G-d, and through which He becomes a King over the entire creation, which ultimately results in the fact that all of creation comes from the Primary being, G-d.
It's obvious that since every Jew, men and even women and children, brings about the existence of the entire creation, they become masters over the world, and thus every single creation owes them recognition for this good.
Being that through the Jew, all beings were created, he therefore becomes the master over all of them.
This is especially so in regards to what needs to be accomplished on erev [every?] Rosh Hashana.
Since the judgment of Rosh Hashana is primarily regarding physical matters, as explained in Likutei Torah, therefore the Jew is in complete control, particularly over physical matters.
The physicality of the world itself has to recognize the good that the Jew has accomplished.
Through the Jews they came into being, and their true existence is through their unity with the True Being.
Since G-d and the Jews are one, each Jew becomes a True Being, and is thus able to bring about all of creation.
He therefore has control over all of creation and not only that, but they owe him thanks and are indeed thankful, for being provided with abundance in physical and especially spiritual matters.' -- http://bloghumanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/2010/10/22/on-jews-becoming-the-masters-of-the-world-the-coronation-of-hashem-from-the-torah/#masters-of-the-world
Such is the natural culmination of morality when the superior intellect is put in charge of it! The sociopaths will always justify the ubermensch.
It would of course be a travesty of thought to end this missive without giving the punch-line that was printed on the T-Shirt noted above. I wish I had bought one – at the time it was only humorous. It read:
Nietzsche is Dead -- God!
I can hear someone laughing...
Because I can actually feel that laugh down my spine without any physical sound waves impinging upon my eardrums from across the ethernet, it shows me that, inter alia: Morality likewise is naturally felt, not naturally thought.
Morality originates from the heart where feelings reside, not the mind – Plato's virtuous philosopher-king notwithstanding. Such abstract intellectualism, including his Shapes, appear to reside in the vast immanent-space of the philosopher's mind alone since they can find no empirical verification in the far more constrained existential reality-space. The only morality that the intellect is empirically shown to beget through time immemorial, is the Nietzscheian-Hegelian variety explored above, of might has rights! It is also known as the divinely ordained moral law of the jungle to some. To others, it constitutes the categorical imperatives which are beyond good and evil. To still others, it is simply amoral precision of “military-style objectivity”.
Whereas, interestingly, as in all lovers' happy or tragic tales also since time immemorial, the Heart also is where the Almighty resides! Read both the Qur'an and the Bible and one sees references to the heart as the container for morality, for spiritual eyes, for cleanliness of the heart begetting the cleanliness of the soul, for cognitively incomprehensible admonitions of none shall approach the truth unless they approach it with a cleansed heart, for there being a seal put on the heart of those who are heedless and who are the purveyors of falsehoods, who bring misery upon mankind by their 'uber' clever planning, etceteras. I have yet to recall knowing anyone who fell in love through their mind as opposed to through their heart. Or even recall reading any literature, sacred or divine, and I am an indefatigable reader, that alluded to the mind for matters of love, faith, courage, self-sacrifice, and yes, the notorious jihad – jihad-un-nafs – the primordial inner struggle of the soul to overcome the “banality of evil” only upon the conquest of which, the sword is automagically both found and comes unsheathed! And when I used to read comparative religions, I recall also the case of appeal to the heart being true of Hindu scriptures as well as others.
In conclusion, “Cogito Ergo Sum” might have taken a tiny lesson from Zen were it not so imbued in its own arrogance of the intellect and so blinded by its own brilliance to actually have missed the commonsense. Watch Zen Master Bruce Lee so simply teach it here:
Caption “We need emotional content. Don't think, feeeel; it is like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory”!
It should be patently obvious to anyone that an intellect voluntarily serving under the command of morality can be the only possible solution for equitable and peaceable “Cogito Ergo Sum” for all mankind, rather than for the 'uber' few when it's put the other way around.
I will humbly further suggest that the clincher empirical proof that morality and intellect are separate entities, that morality is primarily rooted in feelings rather than in the intellect, is that had ordinary people simply retained even an iota of humanity in them, even a tiny feeling of empathy for the suffering of fellowman, for their own natural tribe of mankind, then, instead of intellectually watching the decimation of their own kith and kin all unfold on television looking from the side, at best going tsk tsk, and at worst cheering, we would have collectively marched in formation and forcibly neutered all the hectoring hegemons now so boldly munching on their victims no differently than the lowly wildebeest and buffaloes do against the hectoring hegemons of their jungle!
And no scientist in the universe can argue with a straight face that the poor buffaloes who feel the pain so immensely for their own humble kith and kin as depicted in the video below, are a very cognitive species – a fact also brazenly recognized by our own hectoring hegemons which is perhaps why they work so assiduously on desensitizing our feelings of empathy for our fellowman, including for our ownselves, by continually bringing us all the manufactured Hollywood violence and other baser entertainment:
Also see: Allama Iqbal - marde-momin or superman? Part-I
Short URL: http://tinyurl.com/Allama-Iqbal-ubermensch
Source URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/12/morality-from-intellect-is-enslavement.html
Morality derived from the Intellect leads to Enslavement! By Zahir Ebrahim 8/8