Beginning long before the invention of writing, a
slow but definite evolution of our concern for other human beings has been underway. It has produced significant changes in our feelings and important
improvements in our social conduct.
Currently, our most respected neighbors intend
no harm and act consistent with the belief that human beings are not to be murdered, tortured, endangered by neglect, starved, harassed, assaulted,
molested, robbed, enslaved, subjected to forced labor, hated, deceived, swindled, slandered, libeled, disparaged, disrespected, envied, denied their
legal rights or denied equal protection under the law. For thousands of years, being charitable, productive, helpful, kind and faithful to ones agreements
have also been on the rise. Some meditate or pray to resolve anger and avoid hatred. A few even abstain from crude language. Conscious consideration
of the feelings and interests of others has become a widespread phenomenon.
The impetus for this improvement is not purely
cultural. The infant knows that pain is bad and comfort is good. The child's identification with other people is immediate. Love of humanity is inborn.
While this love can be diminished or destroyed, even incorrigible criminals have a sense of fairness. The natural variation of siblings in each of
thousands of generations have played out their individual fates and demonstrated the consequences of their varying behavioral propensities. At risk
throughout has been the survival of humanity. In this long process, it is evident that the more murderous and asocial traits are being selected against.
Independent of beliefs about creation, goodness
is known to exist as a feature of both the world and us, and we now insist upon it. Individuals may be at a loss to explain where this inborn sense of
goodness comes from, or they may disagree as to its origin, but within our documented history (both written and archaeological), we have the strongest
empirical evidence that we cannot thrive without it. We have discovered that all of the positive outcomes that we so fervently seek depend on good
character.
Fortunately, we are somewhat conscious and
therefore need not merely wait for our further betterment to slowly evolve. Unfortunately, we have yet to rid our social structures and customs of
coercion and counterproductive incentives. For instance, unlike an organization inspired by loyalty to an idea, an organization based upon personal
loyalty to its leader is almost certain to be corrupt. In a single-leader organization, favors, bribes and all manner of trickery and intrigue become likely
in efforts to gain the favor of the prince, the czar, the fuhrer or the emperor because, within that structure, there is no operating principle that justifies
or authorizes individual efforts to benefit the whole. The only authorization is the approval of the sovereign. Multi-leader organizations can also fall
victim to this effect where the authority of the leaders is not adequately defined through the application of principles understood and supported by all
concerned. Defective organizations can frustrate the best intentions of its members.
Occasionally, religious leaders of diverse faiths get
together to help solve a problem. It is not because they all pray to the same saints, or because they all believe in reincarnation, or because they all have
the same view of creation. It may be because people are starving, or because gangs are taking over a city, or because a moral confusion is threatening
massive destruction. I believe such coalitions should be non-governmental charities that are more common and more permanent. Their purposes would
include reinforcing the goodness in people and helping to repair it where it has been damaged; illustrating the value of honesty and fairness within
organizations; seeking practicable solutions to moral problems; and exposing dishonesty, corruption and hurtful practices. The views and experience
of its participants should be available to people of all faiths and to the those uncommitted to a faith and to those who have no faith. Its writers and
speakers should include religious leaders; historians; experts in science, technology and the social sciences; and interested researchers. Every aspect
of human life would improve if this were to take place.
If you would like to assist in forming an
organization based on these ideas, please contact me directly. My email address is
jim@futurebeacon.com.
You can also go to
my contact page to get my full contact information.