Mentatul Monthly Focus
November 2019 Edition
– Child Psychology –
Some adults lack morality even after an entire lifetime. Yet, as a study shows, healthy ethical values are something that the vast majority of us are born with. So when does one lose one’s moral compass? Perhaps, like almost any quality in life, it has to be cultivated.
If one would be to chronicle the history of illegal or unfair use of economic practices, one would probably need to fill ten tomes of at least a thousand pages each. From rich to poor, almost everybody has, at least once, suffered due to our misshapen financial system.
There are many reasons for this, such as perfectly healthy and natural human greed. The problem is that greed and other evolutionary adaptations have been allowed to spiral out of control by a broken educational system. Insufficient education allows profit-seeking entities to exploit evolutionary weaknesses. They profit by making individuals invest into items and activities of no real value (no increase in happiness and no profit for the individuals or their families).
What I advocate is ethical everything. The implementation of such a system concerns the fusion between an ever-evolving ethical framework and a super-fragmented decentralized financial system. Let’s see what these terms mean.
You’re 102 years old. You still want and can work. You have no disease, your mind is sharp and brings joy to those around. However, the industrialized healthcare system and society has other plans. You’re costly to keep under permanent supervision, as if you even want to be constantly watched. So, whether you like it or not, you must accept round-the-clock care or move to a nursing home. This happened to David Goodall. Thanks to Swiss laws, however, he could die on his own accord.
Euthanasia is a heavily debated topic. Many people have sought the right to end their life. Check what Terry Pratchett (suffering from Alzheimer’s) had to say about it. Pro-life associations rushed to condemn BBC for broadcasting Pratchett’s statement, accusing BBC of imbalanced reporting.
How would you feel if some dudes would grab somebody dear to you, tie that person to a car and drag them around town for a couple of miles? While doing this, of course, they would laugh, because torture is fun.
And then there’s this horrific way to celebrate students: a jungle-themed prom where majestic wild animals are disrespected and psychologically tormented. This sets, of course, a wonderful example for the adults, parents and decision makers of tomorrow.
Finally, thanks to the CLOUD act passed earlier this year, American companies have the right to spy for the government of the USA on pretty much anybody that uses American products. The act also indirectly opens the door for other governments that enjoy snooping in their citizens’ private lives. And guess what, major tech companies had no problem turning their back on their customers because (surprise!) the act will save them loads of cash:
It was bound to happen sooner or later. Of course, this is all done with ethics and responsibility at the forefront, in the glorious battle against organized crime. Even if I wasn’t sarcastic, this is, after all, yet another weapon in the USA’s cyberwarfare arsenal. And the walls protecting our private lives have already started to fall.
We often gasp at the amount of wealth various entrepreneurs have amassed. News about economic inequality (sometimes known as income inequality) is quite common lately, and so it should be. Slowly but surely, society’s patience is reaching the breaking point and when that happens, chaos ensues.
It is hard not to be shocked when confronted with the knowledge that the accumulated wealth of 42 individuals (no typo, it really is a two-digit number) is greater than that of the poorest half of the world’s population put together. And then there’s that already outdated statistic about the world’s top 1% owning more than the bottom X% (82% as of 2017 and growing).
Is there a reason to rage when these statistics show up? To many, the answer is an obvious “yes”. Indeed, the disparity is staggering, but fury isn’t usually the right attitude to address a problem. There are many factors that contribute to the present state of affairs and we are directly responsible for some of them. Owning up to this is the first step towards improving things.
As I’ll soon show, there are different kinds of “rich and powerful”. Some of these people are highly beneficial for the progress of our species, while others are destroying lives and wrecking our ecosystem, dragging down society by setting the wrong examples.
Back in September of 2017, I met Oliwer, a Norwegian Green Peace activist looking for donations in Stockholm. He told me that they’re trying to stop the Norwegians from drilling for oil in the Arctic. He also told me about how a powerful, profitable company involved in logging is attempting to disrupt the environmental organization by suing it for a massive amount in damages to their business.
I asked him to tell me more, as it was hard to understand for me how such a thing could even work. My image of Green Peace was that of a world-wide, semi-decentralized network of agents (mostly volunteers). It’s hard to kill such an organization, especially given the volunteering aspect. Unfortunately, most money still leaves a trail (I’d switch to donations via cryptocurrencies if I were Green Peace).
I promised the man that instead of donating money, I’ll donate time and do what I do best: investigate and write. The case he told me about is only one of the many times corporations and even governments have went after Green Peace. It is, however, one of the most ridiculous (although admittedly not as ridiculous as when the government of Australia tried to basically pay a corporation to sue Green Peace).
Diversity is beautiful. It’s the reason why our planet is so different than everything else we’ve encountered so far. Humans have added to the diversity through art and technology. But what if there is a boundary after which adding more diversity becomes ugly?
Do I blame the engineers that build hyper-cars? Of course not. Besides being a former Formula 1 fan, I know that these people are only doing their job. I do blame, however, a society that doesn’t encourage these bright minds to work on fixing bigger, more meaningful problems.
Irrespective of us having free will or not, at least a part of our mind is taking decisions based on a very deeply rooted program. That program is our instinct and, like for all other species, its job is to ensure our survival. Instinct is both necessary and ruthless.
In the same time, we’re living in a society that reaches for higher moral grounds through the evolution of ethics and empathy. Our need for moral progress is probably also an evolutionary trait, ensuring social progress, which is a necessity of our survival as a species. We have gotten this far not only because we are skilled individuals, but also because we’ve found ways to work together through the direst of circumstances. However, the evolution of our society is sometimes in conflict with the instinct of the individual.
Throughout the past years there have been several high-profile occasions when apps were in the news for questionable tracking strategies. Even applications that do not use novel means of compromising our privacy are gobbling up increasing amounts of data while their creators cash in on the profits obtained from selling the user’s digital life to the highest bidder. At the receiving end of this deluge of spyware are we, the people.
Even for those of us that do read the list of permissions an app requests upon installation, it is hard to avoid installing certain apps because they come with other features that we need. It’s an old trick that is akin to the Trojan horse. This is how these dubious app creators get in our back yard: by offering something that is 90% useful and 10% spyware, but which must be accepted as a whole.
