What does the moral code of idealism look like?

[Soul_of_Shu]

Certainly I can accept that there are limits to what can be beneficial from suffering with someone, which it seems would be conducive to a healing process in knowing that one is not alone in that regard, as others can be examples of how it is possible to heal, and take valid life lessons from it, resiliency being one of them. Again, my only point is that not adding to it, beyond what seems inevitable, and the realization of the primacy of our shared consciousness, wherein all our experience is inextricable at some collective level, feels crucially imperative to our transfiguration into the integral stage.

[Ed Konderla]

I'm curious, what is your job or was your job? The reason I am asking I have never been in an environment where anyone dissects words in a conversation like you and Shu. Don't get me wrong I have worked in environments where no one was a native English speaker and if someone were to misunderstand my instructions there could be a large smoking crater where a powerplant or refinery used to be. So I know accurate communication matters but man that seems laborious.

[Soul_of_Shu]

I'm curious, what is your job or was your job? The reason I am asking I have never been in an environment where anyone dissects words in a conversation like you and Shu. Don't get me wrong I have worked in environments where no one was a native English speaker and if someone were to misunderstand my instructions there could be a large smoking crater where a powerplant or refinery used to be. So I know accurate communication matters but man that seems laborious.

All of the lexicon of metaphysics/ontology that I've absorbed has been from long participation in the old MS forum from which this forum evolved, or from over 30 years of reading countless metaphysical texts, most recently Bernardo's body of work, and has nothing to do with the various ways I've managed to make a living. So if there isn't a certain familiarity with the terms, then I suppose it can seem laborious when some more precise dissection occurs. But it's just what I've become used to, and if it's not what others are used to, then so be it. Such is the case with some of the math geeks who get into discussions here that leave me in bewilderment, and fast-forwarding to the next comment or topic ... I trust they forgive me.

[Ed Konderla]

I'm not surprised by your response. I've had the opportunity to live this crazy diverse life and one learns in a hurry every religion, craft, discipline, culture etc. has it's own vocabulary. Consequently I've adopted a "close enough" approach because there is no way I can keep up with all of it. Working in Hong Kong for 2.5 years with Mainland China engineers that spoke better English than I do but they would never ever not happening tell you they didn't understand something you said to them could. Now that could be a huge safety hazard.. In this forum the risks are substantially lower.

[AshvinP]

I'm curious, what is your job or was your job? The reason I am asking I have never been in an environment where anyone dissects words in a conversation like you and Shu. Don't get me wrong I have worked in environments where no one was a native English speaker and if someone were to misunderstand my instructions there could be a large smoking crater where a powerplant or refinery used to be. So I know accurate communication matters but man that seems laborious.

I am an attorney so, as you say, accurate communication really matters. It could be the difference between a successful case and a client losing their home or business and a multi million malpractice lawsuit which sinks my practice. I find philosophy to be very similar. If I am not precise now, then someone may come away with the exact opposite meaning of what I intended and it may take me 10 more comments just to clear that up. And the stakes are probably higher than we like to admit.

[Soul_of_Shu]

I'm not surprised by your response. I've had the opportunity to live this crazy diverse life and one learns in a hurry every religion, craft, discipline, culture etc. has it's own vocabulary. Consequently I've adopted a "close enough" approach because there is no way I can keep up with all of it. Working in Hong Kong for 2.5 years with Mainland China engineers that spoke better English than I do but they would never ever not happening tell you they didn't understand something you said to them could. Now that could be a huge safety hazard.. In this forum the risks are substantially lower.

Clearly it's quite relative, as some of your comment above jumps out at me as being in need of an editor

Anyway, true enough, this may be one of the few places where someone having left their body due to some arcane communication could actually be considered a good thing

[Ed Konderla]

I understand. Many who comment use tons of very formal language and zero substance. I'll do better after my left hand heals from a chainsaw injury. I wasn't cut but a kickback wrecked a tendon. I can type as fast as most secretaries, although with many more errors. This hen pecking is driving me crazy.

[Lou Gold]

Interesting dialogue going on here. There seems to be some agreement as to identifying the ego with an earlier evolutionary competitive struggle for survival. However, modern evolutionary science finds this highly debatable, as there's now a raging dialogue over whether competition or cooperation was more important for survival. Indeed, the thinking and research is leaning more and more toward a very significant role for mutualism. So why identify the ego only negatively with a competitive struggle for survival and not also positively with a caring and sharing, which is also embedded deeply in the psyche? Indeed, would the 'golden rule' even be recognizable if there was not something in the psyche that had already cognized it?

[AshvinP]

Interesting dialogue going on here. There seems to some agreement as to identifying the ego with an earlier evolutionary competitive struggle for survival. However, modern evolutionary science finds this highly debatable, as there's now a raging dialogue over whether competition or cooperation was more important for survival. Indeed, the thinking and research is leaning more and more toward a very significant role for mutualism. So why identify the ego only negatively with a competitive struggle for survival and not also positively with a caring and sharing, which is also embedded deeply in the psyche? Indeed, would the 'golden rule' even be recognizable if there was not something in the psyche that had already cognized it?

Good point. Hoffman gives the example of evolution producing not just cooperation, but self-sacrifice. I forgot what species (some kind of squirrel?), but it will give out a shriek when a bird of prey is around which draws attention to itself but allows the other ones to get to safety. He explains this is a strategy the gene employs to survive and be passed along to future generations. So yes, the wise ways of evolutionary process are only beginning to be understood and are not contained with the often misunderstood concept of "survival of the fittest" through pure zero-sum competition. Under an idealist world-conception, it is an extremely powerful theory.

[Lou Gold]

So what does it look like?
Is it a world with no police or armies?
Is it a world where nobody's travel is restricted including through the front door of you house?
Is it a world where a survey is done and once we know who is the poorest of the poor that level should be mandated to all?
Is it a world where powerful politicians and the ultra rich like Bill Gates dictate how we live and no one tells them how to live?

I see many times stated or implied that idealism will make a better world than materialism. Although I fully accept idealism I have yet to see a way it produces a plan of action to take on the world's challenges. Maybe it is supposed to function as a trickle up code of ethics that once some critical mass of followers is reached the rest of society will switch over to it. I would not have a problem with that if it weren't for the timeline I see. It's like in the middle of the worst wild fires in California the decision was made to either wait for the rain or for it to burn itself out. Both legitimate decisions if one can live with the consequences.

Ed, you have surely framed interesting challenges to idealism at the practical level, which raise deeper perennial questions about free will vs collective responsibility. Generally, I agree that Idealism does not offer clear guidance at the practical level. It is certainly complex where the rubber meets the road. Sadly, it's often over-simplified. For example, equality at the lowest common denominator is not generally the debate between equity vs equality where the issue is more practically whether to handicap competition amongst diversity, such as in horse racing or sailing via social policies. And, yes, the outcomes are more likely to be determined by events and politics than by philosophies.