How to get from Universal Ethics to The Promised Land?

[Simple Minded]

For me, its getting back to practical reasoning and thinking of ethics more plainly as character and not some sort of all encompassing image in the mind's eye that is a more sensible avenue.

Epictetus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, one could find worse guides to living a good life.

[noddy]

My point is this, the idea of trying to find that one system at the end of a long process of mental agitation is the wrong approach. It doesn't work because it's silly to begin with- though attempted for very important and well-intentioned reasons, some even insightful. We've tried to find that special mental space where all social references are excluded, no theology, no law, no aesthetics; at the end of long process of mental agitation, and one could be justified in saying that going back to narratives (however under-explained) to discuss ethical behaviors would be one approach that isn't as discredited as once imagined. For me, its getting back to practical reasoning and thinking of ethics more plainly as character and not some sort of all encompassing image in the mind's eye that is a more sensible avenue.

Sounds suspiciously like a paragraph circling the golden rule to me.

I will have to let it fester, erm, percolate a while.

[noddy]

For me, its getting back to practical reasoning and thinking of ethics more plainly as character and not some sort of all encompassing image in the mind's eye that is a more sensible avenue.

Epictetus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, one could find worse guides to living a good life.

the stoic virtues.

Wisdom
Courage
Temperance
Justice

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

For me, its getting back to practical reasoning and thinking of ethics more plainly as character and not some sort of all encompassing image in the mind's eye that is a more sensible avenue.

Epictetus, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, one could find worse guides to living a good life.

All fine picks

And it is best put into the hands of children. Not that it won't enliven the mind of old folks

but if ethics is a handmaiden, it is to child development.

And bogging it down as a rulebook, or a substitution for religion, or religion itself obscures that.

====================

Mothers and fathers tell their sons and daughters how brave they are. If I went up to SM or noddy, and said, "You're such a brave boy!" I pretty sure my teeth would be in the back of my throat before I could get the full sentence out, and for good reason. It'd be a lack of wisdom, temperance and justice on my part...but maybe it would show some sense of a madman's courage.

The thing is all of those, coming out of the mouth of an adult in a normal conversation (and not in an obnoxious way) with other adults are just restated conclusions. We can make abstractions of them because we've already crystallized impressions and ideas associated with the term. If its spoken at all, it's almost always restating some sort of regulative principle. I would never rule out exceptions to that, sudden changes, new insights...but the only time it's not regulative, where the roles of speaker and listener are not like that, is when there has been a great crisis or one figure has lost social standing to the other.

With kids its different.

[noddy]

The thing is all of those, coming out of the mouth of an adult in a normal conversation (and not in an obnoxious way) with other adults are just restated conclusions. We can make abstractions of them because we've already crystallized impressions and ideas associated with the term. If its spoken at all, it's almost always restating some sort of regulative principle. I would never rule out exceptions to that, sudden changes, new insights...but the only time it's not regulative, where the roles of speaker and listener are not like that, is when there has been a great crisis or one figure has lost social standing to the other.

An example of that being - someone on this forum used to argue it in terms of the inalienable and obvious, natural rights.

Life: everyone is entitled to live.
Liberty: everyone is entitled to do anything they want to so long as it doesn't conflict with the first right.
Estate: everyone is entitled to own all they create or gain through gift or trade so long as it doesn't conflict with the first two rights.

the first two are still strong, but the ability to own the box of air 30 metres up , which itself is highly dependant on the services it recieves from the collective, is quite an abstract concept to the modern city dweller.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

The thing is all of those, coming out of the mouth of an adult in a normal conversation (and not in an obnoxious way) with other adults are just restated conclusions. We can make abstractions of them because we've already crystallized impressions and ideas associated with the term. If its spoken at all, it's almost always restating some sort of regulative principle. I would never rule out exceptions to that, sudden changes, new insights...but the only time it's not regulative, where the roles of speaker and listener are not like that, is when there has been a great crisis or one figure has lost social standing to the other.

An example of that being - someone on this forum used to argue it in terms of the inalienable and obvious, natural rights.

Life: everyone is entitled to live.
Liberty: everyone is entitled to do anything they want to so long as it doesn't conflict with the first right.
Estate: everyone is entitled to own all they create or gain through gift or trade so long as it doesn't conflict with the first two rights.

the first two are still strong, but the ability to own the box of air 30 metres up , which itself is highly dependant on the services it recieves from the collective, is quite an abstract concept to the modern city dweller.

Following through on this, there is a sort of 'beware the ethical man' when applied to society.

[Parodite]

The Swiss Knife

MN told Sean Hannity PG wants to talk to him about something.

MN: Dear Sean, go have a talk to PG, he seems upset about something. Not sure what it is about. He was mumbling about a Swiss knife and how disappointing you are. It sounded weird.

SH: Oh. Yea weird indeed! I hope he is happy with what I'm doing, finally. I always have put Him, family, community and Truth first. In my private life and my work as a commentator on Fox News. But it never feels like it is enough for him. Especially when I myself am doing the very best I can. Then Dad always seems most ready to call me out and dump his disappointments on me. Again!

MN: I know and don't understand it either. It seems he was never very happy with you from the get-go. Maybe he has too high expectations of you. With some of your lesser siblings he has hardly has a problem accepting who they are and what they do. Or maybe he just had a bad day when you were born and can't help himself. Ask him about it! He is only divine after all, like the rest of us here.

SH: Sure will Mom. but I won't hold my breath. It's probably the same all over again. Fake news! Allegations that don't hold up under scrutany. I might suggest to him doing some commentary on the leftwing MSM. CNN and MSNBC would love to have him trashing his Conservative yet Stinky Walmart Deplorable Eternally Disappointing son "Sean Hannity". I'm tired of it!

MN (smiling): Relax love. It just happens to be your particular cross to carry on your way to Golgotha. Everybody wears a private load on their journey to the end-point in time. Never assume others have a lighter weight to carry than you. That would be childish.


(SH knocks the door of his Father's Office)

PG: I know it's you Sean! That hesitant knock on my door without conviction. I smell your fear from far away but please, come in!

(To Sean's surprise his Dad welcomed him with a smile (and little grin) on his face and even open arms. PG hugged his son. SH's arms started to make it reciprocal but were blocked on their way when he started thinking... and immediately talking.)

SH: "Oh, hi Dad, how are you. Good it seems. But I will never understand why you have to express your love to me only showing interest when I do something wrong. As I understand that is what I am here for. To stand corrected. Even though in your absence I did all my duties and daily prayers! What have you been up to lately? Not much it seems. Half of our blessed United States is going crazy over Trump. I do my best to counter the mental illness taking over the Left. The hypocrisy, the lying and manipulations, the corrupted media being their propaganda outlet. I do this all in your Name and in the name of Truth! While more terrible developments are taking place with China, with the eternal crook Putin and all the bloodshed in the Middle East. With liberty in danger in so many places! I'm more and more sympathetic to people who gave up on you. You do nothing about it. Admit it Dad!

PG: Whoohoho not so fast son. The only reason you are here, as with everything else which is, what was and will be...is because of me. I can't be removed from reality, lest it would die along with me. Can you imagine no reality, known and/or unknown to exist? You can't, and for good reasons. And as a conservative family man you know what usually happens with single moms. Your mother would end up in great distress without me, probably sucking Social Tit from another Universe. A Communist Matriarch of sorts. You don't wan't that to happen to her and the world either. I know you are a good kid and I have trust in you.

SH: But that doesn't change the fact that you do nothing about anything right now. You are loosing the popular vote because of it dad, wake up! People start creating Fake Fathers who of course can only betray and cheat. Looks about time for you to take some action! They also stop listening to MN in their distress, blaming "climate change" for instance. Assigning all guilt to a relatively small player called CO2. Or just blame the human species in general. All the Unknowns are just too complex and too big to handle for us! What are you waiting for??

PG: But you know why all that is. It is Satan! You don't seem to have come to terms with The Great Bastard yet. But I told ya!

SH: Not many take Satan very serious anymore. I think that is a good thing. He is probably sipping a sad Scotch whisky with Hillary Clinton in that obscure "the situation room" of CNN. Or he is relegated to the realms of metaphor and concept, which is probably even worse as it means you are dead, done and zero.

PG: Satan is part of Creation, always! Which is what I tried to convey to your predecessors in a story. But don't let it scare you more than necessary. He is "part of life" in your common & contemporary language. He is as real as real can get real. Hiding from him is worse than not thanking me for the life I gave you. Or even forget about me entirely. It doesn't matter to you or me that much. I actually need very little praise and prayers. But you need to go out and look for Satan again, the "black swan". At least if you have a theory that I, your Papa God Creator, exist i.e. that all swans are white.

SH: But you claim black swan Satan does exist and is as real as real can be real, which suggests he shouldn't be too hard to identify and find. Finding Snaky Satan would then prove you don't exist, making your claims and advice here paradoxical. Nonsensical in our common language. A game of words and logic. Not a selling point to the average Trump voter either. Maybe Satanists would love this line of reasoning more.

PG: But you get very close now son. It is only a very small step from axiom to paradox. It is actually so small that it is undetectable by any measurement. And no sequence of words can even begin to mend the rift. An impossibility on a fundamental level. Remember that the moment Adam and Eve "knew" good and evil... I also magically disappeared. They were "evicted from Eden". When they didn't know of themselves yet they were in paradise without Satan and still with Me. Eden is like a dream you know you had but can't remember anymore.

SH: You might be onto something Dad. Let me try say it in my own words.

PG: Sorry Son, your own and even my words here are of no use. Which is the point. Are these really my words... or your own talking and listening to yourself? Axiom-paradox. With knowing the known came the unknown. Knowledge, knowing good and evil, is defenseless against knowing there are vast unknowns and possibly even bigger unknown unknowns. On top of never ending change and fundamental unpredictability. Satan is that sea of uncertainty and impermanence looking you in the face everyday. From the moment you wake up in the morning, where you are sure you just had a dream... but can't remember it anymore. Or waking-up from what appears to be a strange nothingness as a small child suddenly realizing you are a self-aware "I think therefor I am" human being that exists.

SH: Whatever. I prefer living my life just trying to fix things and do what I believe is right. And what does all this have to do with me anyways, or that Swiss knife Mom heard you mumble about?

PG: Ah, yes. Watching you and others on TV defending Trump against the Dems and their Orange Man Bad syndrome, the yes/no quit pro quo stuff; it is just that you forget it is you who created these paranoid disillusioned lefties going crazy over Trump.

It should never be about money deals this for that. Money is just a Swiss knife that can be used in a thousand different ways; for good, bad or any mix of that. It is a vehicle and tool for your intentions. Talk intentions for a change and stop the quit poo pro money talk. You think those crazy lefties don't have good intentions? They are as good or bad as any other. Like guns can be used to manage and control violence but also to commit violent crimes.

Money is value free and meaningless without the intentions with which it is put to use. Lefties don't trust Trump's intentions understandably, so you should help them trust him more instead of trying to prove what an idiots and hypocrites they are. At least.. if your intention is to help cure them from their derangement syndrome. But you are not. You want them to be destroyed during the next elections. The crazier they behave the better it is for Trump&Co. Democrats who behave reasonable with a modicum of sanity in a calm and assertive way could defeat Trump easily. Your mother has send our oldest, Tulsi Gabbard, out into the field for that reason. But I'm skeptical because some problems can only be solved by the gender that created them. Such as violent territorial wars. It is a man's thing primarily. Tulsi is way too sweet and sexy. She could create a temporal lull in the war zones, but not long term improvement. I put Trump on the scene for that, but it is not yet too apparent for most. Not even for Trump himself.

[crashtech66]

I'm enjoying these fanciful dialogues, Parodite. Thanks for sharing them with us.

[Simple Minded]

Mothers and fathers tell their sons and daughters how brave they are. If I went up to SM or noddy, and said, "You're such a brave boy!" I pretty sure my teeth would be in the back of my throat before I could get the full sentence out, and for good reason. It'd be a lack of wisdom, temperance and justice on my part...but maybe it would show some sense of a madman's courage.

The thing is all of those, coming out of the mouth of an adult in a normal conversation (and not in an obnoxious way) with other adults are just restated conclusions. We can make abstractions of them because we've already crystallized impressions and ideas associated with the term. If its spoken at all, it's almost always restating some sort of regulative principle. I would never rule out exceptions to that, sudden changes, new insights...but the only time it's not regulative, where the roles of speaker and listener are not like that, is when there has been a great crisis or one figure has lost social standing to the other.

With kids its different.

Well said.

I wouldn't punch ya, it would demonstrate a lack of self control and bad (non-golden rule) conduct. If I was 45 years younger, I might find you man-splaning your assumption that my self-identity as a "brave male" to be offensive, but only on my PMS days. . Woke Scolding is best done on high flow days.

As I have often said "Offense is in the receiver, not the transmitter!" Obvious as hell, put perhaps the "Universal Ethical Key" to pissing people off. I think some people are addicted to the biological chemistry of living in drama, trauma, and being pissed off. I have know many. I think "wokeness" in addition to be a social movement, is also a mental disorder similar to being bi-polar.

"Virtue is it's own reward." is about as straight forward as human thought gets, providing those participating in the conversation had "virtue" defined to them similarly when they were in their formative years.

All the major religions and some philosophies were all created/revealed as attempts to solve the problem: "How to get from Universal Ethics to The Promised Land?" Their adherents think they are the key, They just don't understand why the outsiders just can't get it?

Two other great Philosophical quotes:
"I know you are but what am I?"
"I'm rubber and your'e glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you."

If I can get enough pain meds, that's my PhD thesis, or maybe even thesi.

[Simple Minded]

Mothers and fathers tell their sons and daughters how brave they are. If I went up to SM or noddy, and said, "You're such a brave boy!" I pretty sure my teeth would be in the back of my throat before I could get the full sentence out, and for good reason. It'd be a lack of wisdom, temperance and justice on my part...but maybe it would show some sense of a madman's courage.

The thing is all of those, coming out of the mouth of an adult in a normal conversation (and not in an obnoxious way) with other adults are just restated conclusions. We can make abstractions of them because we've already crystallized impressions and ideas associated with the term. If its spoken at all, it's almost always restating some sort of regulative principle. I would never rule out exceptions to that, sudden changes, new insights...but the only time it's not regulative, where the roles of speaker and listener are not like that, is when there has been a great crisis or one figure has lost social standing to the other.

With kids its different.

Well said.

I wouldn't punch ya, it would demonstrate a lack of self control and bad (non-golden rule) conduct. If I was 45 years younger, I might find you man-splaning your assumption that my self-identity as a "brave male" to be offensive, but only on my PMS days. . Woke Scolding is best done on high flow days.

As I have often said "Offense is in the receiver, not the transmitter!" Obvious as hell, put perhaps the "Universal Ethical Key" to pissing people off. I think some people are addicted to the biological chemistry of living in drama, trauma, and being pissed off. I have know many. I think "wokeness" in addition to be a social movement, is also a mental disorder similar to being bi-polar.

"Virtue is it's own reward." is about as straight forward as human thought gets, providing those participating in the conversation had "virtue" defined to them similarly when they were in their formative years.

All the major religions and some philosophies were all created/revealed as attempts to solve the problem: "How to get from Universal Ethics to The Promised Land?" Their adherents think they are the key, They just don't understand why the outsiders just can't get it?

Two other great Philosophical quotes:
"I know you are but what am I?"
"I'm rubber and your'e glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you."

If I can get enough pain meds, PhD thesis will be based on the timeless wisdom of "DON'T BE AN durian!" and "THAT'S WHY STUPID IS SUPPOSED TO HURT!"

[noddy]

well, all the nice thoughts only work in times of plenty.

2 monkeys infront of a tree covered in apples, looking out to a forest of more untouched trees, you get perfect behaviour.

4 monkeys reaching for the last couple of apples on the last tree, things gets wild fast.

with humans and all their imagination and empathy, you can get the primal madness of the scrabbling for the last apples even before they run out - just by one monkey realising what will happen eventually and then empathising with how everyone will act, and boom.

I knew he was going to hit me so I hit him back first.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Those monkeys acting wildly are acting within character.

The Iliad and Odyssey gives one the impression that Odysseus's cunning is something admirably ethical. But it is also clear from the text that he's a liar and a jerk. Same thing might apply to martial ethics overall....while there is overlap, it isn't always when afforded niceness&times of plenty that we recognize ethics.

This of course being an perennial problem for those marrying the Abrahamic religions to specific ethical systems. And they have their own responses, which are almost besides the point.

There is something pre-social, at least human sociability and our rationalizations at the core. A toddler is not an autonomous moral agent, he or she needs to be nurtured&educed towards that, and much of that nurturing has nothing distinctly to do with our rationality. So we exercise that toddler to become than agent who can present himself or herself intelligibly, socially, and participate in the larger layer. It's about finding a consistency between the two during transition. And if all goes well, that child will be able to reconcile and shape what is expected in that particular situation.

[noddy]

Which brings us to the modern ethical foundation which is harm minimisation, and how to argue its failings without being a sociopath

All the contradictions and hypcrosies that plagued religions are found in that space, you need to go back to pagan tribal ethics to find rule sets which deal with the ugly situations bluntly. (not expressed properly, but the universalist religions do have some complexity and historical awkward reality in that regard)


Harm minimisation is certainly an excellent reference point for laws and punishments - when the cure is worse than the disease it provides the platform to identify that problem... but as an ethical system, its lacking much.

Maybe a proper understanding of conflict is the secret sauce missing, passive aggresive people living in times of plenty have no capacity to rationalise nor justify it, nor see it in themselves, its all dealt with in a hard denial manner that pushes the realities of it off to proxies, like the police or the army, or the central bankers.

and its that lack of honesty about who they really are, that leaves the ethical discussions so empty and trite.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Arguing against harm reduction without being a sociopath?

That's a sentence which makes me feel like Michael Jordan driving towards the hoop.

However delusional on my part, I think that's the easy bit...

The harder one is the honesty bit. But not so much for what is lacking in people, but the jenga-like structure the whole thing runs on.

It's really easy to pull a block from the tower without considering why the tower is the way it is. That one bit is shaky, however fundamental, it doesn't necessarily follow that the rest is.

That may make it all the worse for us. Big issues require big changes and lots of toppling towers. That's why this sort of question leads to out of the frying pan and into the fire sort of responses.

[noddy]

aaaaha, just to be clear.

I wasnt saying that most of the population being sheltered and dishonest about how nice they are is a *problem* per se, I was just riffin on the idea that modern ethical philosophy is missing something.

not sure Michael Jordon would make it through the scrum of progressives with the goal net still in the same place, but thats another story.

[Simple Minded]

I knew he was going to hit me so I hit him back first.

What if you were in a Strine gay bar, and you had already downed a few pints and a very cute Napster walks up and says "You're such a brave boy!"

Would you hit him right away, or let him buy you a few drinks first?

[Simple Minded]

Those monkeys acting wildly are acting within character.


There is something pre-social, at least human sociability and our rationalizations at the core. A toddler is not an autonomous moral agent, he or she needs to be nurtured&educed towards that, and much of that nurturing has nothing distinctly to do with our rationality. So we exercise that toddler to become than agent who can present himself or herself intelligibly, socially, and participate in the larger layer. It's about finding a consistency between the two during transition. And if all goes well, that child will be able to reconcile and shape what is expected in that particular situation.

True nuff. Depending upon what software is loaded into the toddler during his formative years, he will become civilized by the standards of the group that formatted his BIOS. Chistians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. all thought they had solve the Universal Ethics problem. Only problem was the others who had been formatted with different operating systems.

The idea of "fixing things for the common good" always seems to resort to reaching for weapons after reasoning with them by attempting to appeal to their "better nature" fails.

[noddy]

I knew he was going to hit me so I hit him back first.

What if you were in a Strine gay bar, and you had already downed a few pints and a very cute Napster walks up and says "You're such a brave boy!"

Would you hit him right away, or let him buy you a few drinks first?

not into hitting people or hanging out in gay bars, so ill leave all that to your imagination.

[crashtech66]

Just an observation, as adults we just change the words but they mean the same thing.

"Good on you, mate," or "way to go" conveys a very similar sentiment with virtually no risk of offense.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Those monkeys acting wildly are acting within character.


There is something pre-social, at least human sociability and our rationalizations at the core. A toddler is not an autonomous moral agent, he or she needs to be nurtured&educed towards that, and much of that nurturing has nothing distinctly to do with our rationality. So we exercise that toddler to become than agent who can present himself or herself intelligibly, socially, and participate in the larger layer. It's about finding a consistency between the two during transition. And if all goes well, that child will be able to reconcile and shape what is expected in that particular situation.

True nuff. Depending upon what software is loaded into the toddler during his formative years, he will become civilized by the standards of the group that formatted his BIOS. Chistians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. all thought they had solve the Universal Ethics problem. Only problem was the others who had been formatted with different operating systems.

The idea of "fixing things for the common good" always seems to resort to reaching for weapons after reasoning with them by attempting to appeal to their "better nature" fails.

And not only that but there seems to be a problem where when we tackle things head on, we tend to make them worse over the long run.

[Simple Minded]

So, in summary, "we" have already gotten from Universal Ethics to the Promised Land. Only problem is "they" haven't.

"Against stupidity, even the gods struggle in vain."

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

aaaaha, just to be clear.

I wasnt saying that most of the population being sheltered and dishonest about how nice they are is a *problem* per se, I was just riffin on the idea that modern ethical philosophy is missing something.

Well, my concern is framing it as mere dishonesty. I think it a lot more hairy than that.

not sure Michael Jordon would make it through the scrum of progressives with the goal net still in the same place, but thats another story.

Michael Jordan wore a Hitler mustache and boosted sales of Hanes underwear.

CBS News: How Michael Jordan's Hitler Mustache Boosted Sales at Hanes

As just an example of how his fanaticism goes from defying gravity to defying social justice warriors.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

So, in summary, "we" have already gotten from Universal Ethics to the Promised Land. Only problem is "they" haven't.

"Against stupidity, even the gods struggle in vain."

I'd go with: We are stuck with our character wherever we go. It's a diminishing lust.

[Simple Minded]

So, in summary, "we" have already gotten from Universal Ethics to the Promised Land. Only problem is "they" haven't.

"Against stupidity, even the gods struggle in vain."

I'd go with: We are stuck with our character wherever we go. It's a diminishing lust.

reminds me of two quotes, which IIRC are from Buddhism.

"Where've you go, there you are." and "Wherever you go, be there!"

It takes a special form of compassion and enlightenment to recognize the inferiority of others and offer to reformat their Operating System with your own in order to help them and promote the "common good." I'm just not there yet.

Modern wokesters got the translation wrong and are referencing Boo-Hoo-Hoo-ddism as their source material.

[Parodite]

Continuation conversation Stefan M with MN

*******************************************************

SM: (After recovering from his mother's massive boob hug): I don't know Mom. Dad seems going nuts into the abstract. Not sure I want to hear more of him.

MN: It's OK, don't worry. Be sure that his abstractions won't make my boobs any bigger or smaller, nor do they change my own feelings and thoughts. Not much is really lost when he keeps quiet.

SM: But what are your thoughts on Universal Ethics. I'd like to know!

MN: Are you sure? I am anyone's ethics.

SM: Meaning?

MN: When a female lion goes out for a kill her "ethics" is simple: feeding herself and her cubs = good. Going hungry and dying is no fun you know. The female buffalo who fights off that lioness to protect herself and her calve applies the same ethics. Staying healthy, alive and well fed. So you have a lion's ethics and a buffalo's ethics. Add millions more ethics of millions more species to your universal basket. They do it all in their own right and not without a necessary cost to others.

You think human beings somehow don't belong in that same basket? Would your universal ethics apply to the universe of human experience only? To the entire physical universe? There always is more.. you know. I am the Managing Mother of All.

SM: Universal ethics for humans only I suppose. Maybe extended to mammals...

MN: You don't understand what you are asking for with this "universal ethics". And don't forget that also particles compete. They eat and are being eaten all the time. All that exists are patterns that persist over a limited amount of time.

Have you ever contemplated what it is like being a photon? After birth you travel through life with the speed of light with no chance of slowing down and have a rest. Their eternal moment ends abruptly when they hit some other object that will absorb them. It is all a digestive system. Something or somebody is always hungry. "Food for thought" should be taken much more literally too for that reason. Are you hungry for thought Stefan? You will always kill and others pay the price, whether you like it or not.

SM: So I'm condemned to be evil but not guilty of anything. Sounds like a nice Nazi philosophy!

MN: Even if you'd become a vegetarian you still are a killing machine. My suggesting is you start a restaurant where everybody can order and eat anything they want. You could call it the "The Universal Ethics Restaurant" and hang yourself in front of it as a protest. Most likely you will end up on the menu too though.

(SM now starts crying in despair. His Mother does not hesitate and gives him an even bigger smotheringboob hug, gently wiping the tears off his face. As all good mothers do and as described by their natural ethics.)