Update 2.4.2019

I have been working on the project for sometimes. The main contribution of the crypto community should be to redefine the concept of competition or they have achieved very little.
Today I started writing the second part of the morality article. This is how it begins:

“A good technique to start an article or a speech is to use a kind of provocative question in the very beginning. Here is mine:
Why did Mandela decide to fight for his beliefs and spend decades in prison? Why didn’t Che pursue a safer career? Why are there so many political activists in prison in authoritarian regimes? Why didn’t Gandhi just give up fighting? It was safer, it was easier. That was the way to go, logic and reasoning would conclude. Why did Nicholas Winton endangered himself during world war two to save innocent lives who would otherwise end up in concentration camps? There is a bug inside of us, a utilitarianist will say. Our final goal in life is happiness. There is not any in torture, in death. That is suicide, an evolutionist will say. We would survive anyway even if Martin Luther hadn’t, well, committed suicide. Why didn’t Socrates denounce himself, defy himself? We are hardwired for that.
This is a question for evolutionists: Why do we keep changing our world so we need to constantly adapt? The process of fitness is a risky one. Wouldn’t it be safer, serve more to the survival goal to just keep the outside world as is and not going through the risky process of adaptation over and over? This damn tool, this damn desire for constant search is not for survival, no.


Morality; This is the utilitarianism approach:
We put a price tag on every act, on everything. The measure is the utility. The higher the utility the higher the price. You can then put a price tag on lives, on honesty, integrity. You can put price tag on love, on the family. You can put a price tag on truth. What is wrong with that? Nothing, even some of the religious people might conclude. After all isn’t heaven all about utility? Aren’t religious people postpone short-term utility for the ultimate utility? “That is right”, would you say? Che wasn’t a believer. He didn’t do that to have a better life in heaven. He did that because he believed, it was right to do that. Utility played no role. That was “right” Che thought. Did he do that for the utility of others? That’s not utilitarianism. That is not evolutionism too. He did that because he thought it was “right”.Period.
Evolutionism; …. “

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *