Tag Archives: ethics


Ultimately all ethical philosophies run into the problem of quantitative versus qualitative results and the problem of majority rights and/or effects versus minority rights and/or effects.

Ethical considerations should optimize quality humans so they should also try to reproduce as many quality humans as possible so the next generation has quantitatively more quality humans.

Eugenics theory tried to advocate this but was perverted by the Nazi regime so the entire thinking in this area has been censored because there is too much subjectivism in eugenics concepts which are put into realistic practice politically.

DNA analysis and synthesis can make eugenics considerations more objective in the long duration so I feel that individual parents armed with this information can make personal choices on what kinds of offspring they want if any. Designer babies are a possibility in the long duration although I fear that looks or physical appearance will predominate in choices and not brain power and overall health.

Some ethical theories try to optimize beneficial results for the majority of humans with terms such as happiness, welfare, security, etc. The problem with these theories is that the minority gets oppressed or become slaves to the majority of humans and this is an unjust violation of individual or minority rights.

What we really need is a philosophy of moral principles which benefit both the individual and the majority in the short and long duration otherwise an unjust philosophy of the means justifies the ends results.

In nonemergency situations-don’t destroy biodiversity, don’t lie, don’t be inefficient, don’t steal, don’t commit adultery if married, and don’t murder. This secular morality should be taught to all impressionable young minds in elementary school so that they don’t always have to stop and think- Is what I am doing right or wrong? Impulsively offspring will react with this moral foundation and be right most of the time and they should be considered to be moral adults by the age of about 13.

A very important moral principle is “don’t lie” which benefits the individual because he or she can retain integrity and be respected by others in society because he or she is trustworthy. The majority also benefits with this principle because it provides some security in knowing that there are others in society worth trusting. Hopefully the leadership will become less cynical and become more trustworthy too.

“Don’t commit adultery if married” is also very important for the survival of healthy family units which stay together for a much longer duration if there is no adultery going on. Individual family units benefit as does society with many close knit families in it for hopefully the long duration.

Don’t destroy biodiversity, don’t be inefficient, don’t steal, and don’t murder are also very important principles to try to follow for the benefit of the individual and society.

Realistically important government functions have to be financed so taxation which is really a form of stealing can be justified. In fact there are about 5 situations in society where stealing can be justified and you can look this up in my blog article or books.

The real philosophical question is not whether the government should be able to steal your money in the form of taxation but rather how much of it percentage wise should they be permitted to steal?

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4300 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.


If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!




All information is good and bad and in between or a mixture of bad and good information and what Google and other search engines are discovering is that information also has a reputation which can be good or bad or in between.

Criminal, terrorist, malware, immoral, extremely deviant, and untrue or false information is not desirable because it reflects directly on the reputation of the search engine. A search engine should ideally be a trusted source of information and if it is not trusted then its popularity will wane or be subject to legal prosecution.

How do you determine with an algorithm the trustworthiness of the information provided on the web? There is no algorithm which will determine this accurately and ultimately human mediators will be necessary to filter out the very bad information from the mostly good.

Reputable websites will have priority and this will usually mean a website which has been around for a while and has reputable contributors to it. This means that fly by night websites will not be permitted or will soon not appear in searches and humans with good reputations will be the ones whose web sites will appear if they are newly formed. Anonymous websites will begin to disappear from the web and be censored as well as anonymous writers or contributors.

Ultimately humans with good reputations will appear in searches along with their websites and there will be discrimination against those whose reputations are very bad. Humans and bots generate information and soon most information will be traced back to their human or bot generators as a form of protection from very bad information.

Total freedom of speech will no longer exist on the internet and the ultimate goal is to provide moral freedom of speech on the internet and reputable information on the internet.

There is also the danger of political censorship on the web so a legal procedure will have to be devised for regress of grievances if a website is unethically being censored for not being politically correct.

Total freedom of association will also be limited so that criminals, terrorists, and other very undesirable humans can’t freely communicate to promote their nefarious ends. Facebook and other social media will also be censored in favor of moral behavior within the world community.

Sure, criminals will always find ways around the censorship using reputable names or identities as fronts for their operations. This is why there will never be a perfect censorship of very bad information but it can greatly be reduced from the tsunami of crap deluging the internet today.


If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1400 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.


If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!


common_sense (1)



Conscience: n. learned impulsive motivation to do right which is frequently gotten from ethical and/or moral principles which one believes in

A desirable developed largely impulsive conscience which includes morality and ethical principles helps us to interact peacefully and orderly with other humans.  There are humans such as criminals and psychopaths who seem to have no conscience at all or very little conscience. Even those humans with little conscience act impulsively based on what they have learned in their lives and make decisions on what is the right course of action for them personally and which is not always what most humans do. They have a conscience too although it is a very deviant one.

A thief who associates with other thieves may lie to and steal from others but not lie to or steal from his fellow thieves so there is still some vestige of morality present in that human’s impulsive behavior. Extremely selfish humans may lie, steal, and even murder for personal gain so their conscience is rather limited to what is personally right for them and not others.

Nothing is more potent in developing a good moral conscience than role models with good morally developed consciences. The sooner in life that you start developing a desirable moral conscience, the less it will become vulnerable to undesirable radical changes later on in life. If your parents don’t have desirable consciences then there is less probability that you will have a desirable one too.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 900 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.




Humans lie to protect themselves or their ego when they have done something bad or made a mistake, for personal gain, and to maliciously destroy another’s reputation which could be because of revenge or meanness or for personal gain and it can even be done with silent omissions instead of blatant lies.

Personal protection lies:

It was not my fault which is frequently followed with an excuse that something or someone is to blame

I’m sick

It was not my mistake

It was their fault

There’s just this one little problem

Sorry, I missed your call

I’m on my way

I’ll call back latter

I didn’t get the email

It’s not personal

I never got your message

I have it done

I don’t know

Personal gain lies: This is frequently done by exaggerating or lying about ones competence and/or kissing up to or praising another liberally to show a false respect for or love of another. especially if they are in a position of authority.

Customer’s come first

People are our most valuable asset

That’s great

I came up with the idea

You’re doing fine

You will make much money quickly

You will lose 10 pounds in 10 days

You will look 10 years younger

Your dress is beautiful

I love this gift

Reputation destroying lies:

He was nasty, mean, rude, disrespectful, inconsiderate, insincere, incompetent, or unfriendly to me or a customer

She didn’t do her best

He said some bad things about you

She doesn’t seem to like you

He or she is mad at the world and thinks life is unfair

He has a chip on his shoulder

He doesn’t get along well with others

She is not very friendly

His family problems interfere with his work

She lies about me or other humans



The truth is that psychology and psychiatry is trying to replace religion and its traditional function in society and it is doing a very substandard job of it.

Psychiatry and psychology has no guiding moral code and the result is situation ethics where the end justifies the means and that means that it is OK to do something bad and immoral to achieve a greater relative good defined by a very biased emotionally opinionated subjective group of humans with the rights and power to do so.

Psychology and psychiatry are not a science which can prove cause and effect relationships using statistics. They will never be a science and all attempts to try to make them a science are great failures.

For example, one stupid fraudulent experiment was done to show a causal relationship between designer glasses, regular glasses, and the tendency of humans to cheat. The conclusion was that those humans who chose the designer glasses cheated more than those choosing the regular glasses. The fraudulent results showed a significant approximately 30% difference and tried to fraudulently prove the unprovable.

You can’t force causal relationships because there are more than two variables in all psychology and psychiatry experiments using general complex words or variables like cheating which always has many more than just one reason for cheating and it is impossible to determine which reason is affecting the results of their pseudo experiments.

A moral code which is so vital to the peaceful and orderly functioning of society without force or the threat of force is not something which science will never prove by measurement or statistics. Science has helped me to create the moral code based on concepts of energy efficiency in nature and the basic principal that no human or animal likes to be stolen from.

No human likes to be lied to and lying is deceptive and/or fraudulent stealing of the truth which is a subset of stealing but this logical conclusion is not something which the average human is capable of rationalizing but just may intuitively senses that lying to them is immoral or wrong.

It might be an interesting experiment to determine how compulsive liars react to being lied to and prove that being lied to is considered wrong intuitively. I admit that the conclusion to this experiment could disprove my assumption about intuitiveness. If being lied to is not considered wrong in this special case then all forms of stealing may not be biologically programmed to be bad experiences.

If another compulsive liar attracts rather than repulses a compulsive liar my assumption about intuitiveness may have special exceptions to the basic rule and it may not be applicable to every human. Can an intense or “strong” bonding relationship form between two compulsive liars lying to each other? My hypothesis is no, so prove me wrong.

Knowledge and understanding of human nature and wild nature and physics has all helped me to formulate a just moral code for both humans and wild animals and plants. If you can improve on it then be my guest and I will gladly discuss it.

Humans need a simplified just moral code to believe in and live by or they become confused and think that any behavior is possible and justifiable. I sense my behavior is good so I have a right to do it. No, individual human behavior must be subordinated for the betterment of the common good or society and this means that they must be indoctrinated to be truthful and not steal from one another if peaceful interaction will prevail.

No human should be subjected to the fearful trauma of having to live in a lying, deceiving, and stealing environment which is what wild animals have to battle with on a daily basis.

Being civilized by definition means living in a human world governed by just morality which eliminates the fearful trauma of living wild with predators threatening your existence almost every moment.

Mental illness or deviant behavior is the result when people are not governed by an internal moral force or intuitive thinking which keeps them automatically out of deviant behaviors.

Western youth does not have an inhibiting moral sense and it is leading to dysfunctional unproductive lives in society. The faster we get the new generation to believe in a guiding just morality the sooner will we emerge from the social and economic disaster which we are heading into at an alarming speed.

Humans need to intuitively believe what is right or wrong in their daily lives so that they can make wise and useful and fruitful choices impulsively. Situation ethics or relative ethical decisions have no place in the efficient just functioning of human society.

Science is not the ultimate source of all truth but is very relativistic and non judgmental and offers a thousand and one alternative human social structures or moral codes to choose from. Human logical reasoning ability must be used to supplement science facts and make traditional moral codes better for future human use. My moral code is just an update of religious moral codes which have worked rather badly in the past and must be changed for a new technological future society and ultimate one world rule.

There are rare exceptions which justify seemingly illegal means or immorality to achieve good ends. One example is lying or torturing during war to save a life or lives. If you see a gunman at your door and he has a weapon in hand and asks to see your son or daughter then you can lie and tell the gunman that your offspring is not home.

If there is a great probability that you know that thousands of lives of innocent civilians or military personnel may be saved if you can determine the location of a bomb and time is of the essence then you can torture an enemy suspect during time of war only.

Doing something bad or immoral, such as stealing private information, to minimize stealing on the internet or preventing cyber terrorism is another special case where private communications information can be gathered or stolen without a warrant.

The names of internet users, their location, telephone calls, and financial account info can be stolen which can potentially be used to convict drug pushing felons, international thieves, and international cyber terrorists.

Loss of privacy is the price which has to be paid for security from online thieves and cyber terrorists and it is up to the public to insure that the information gathering is in safe secure trustworthy hands.

Once the information has been gathered, including financial information, if the government detects criminal activity in an account then it should proceed to notify the court and ask for a warrant to use this information in a criminal prosecution and at the same time inform the accused that his financial records have been analyzed and there is proof of money laundering or other illegal use of funds.

It is obvious that information is potentially all powerful and it can be used to suppress political dissent and used to gain an unjust advantage of one business over another business which does not have privileged private information.

Can we trust the government with this private information on everyone? In an immoral society which does not function under a secular moral code the answer is NO. If those gathering private information are well screened, moral, and impartial gatherers of information then the answer would be YES!!!!!! So lets quickly start on the road to creating more of those future trustworthy individuals by mandating a moral code in elementary schools across the nation and in every country of the world so we can insure that we will have a rich resource of trustworthy future individuals to run the country and world in a just way and minimize national and international crime.

How do you insure that gatherers of private information are trustworthy and will not divulge this information for personal gain or the benefit of third parties? If the humans in question have not had a moral upbringing and can’t prove a record of impartial judging ability then they should be disqualified as potential information gatherers. If they have an excellent  public record for honesty and impartial judgment then they can qualify to be an information gatherer.

How do you guarantee an excellent reputation and impartiality? The information gatherers should be humans who have studied law and have served many years and have a reputation as impartial judges in criminal and civil prosecutions. Yes, impartial trustworthy excellent reputation should be those similar to standards for supreme court judges with impeccable credentials.

They would be scrutinized by both political parties and if approved be appointed by the president to a position of Supreme Gatherer of Information who would have responsibility for an information gathering organization of previous judges who would be in charge of releasing private information for use in criminal prosecutions throughout the nation or world.

The above reasons all point to the fact that the secular government must have a secular moral code under which it functions to maintain trust with the public that it will not use private information as an unjust advantage to reward special interests at the expense of the private individual. The government should be gathering a huge data bank of information so that criminals or potential enemies of the country can be traced to a location at any time necessary.

No anonymous users of the internet should be permitted to function and communications devices should eventually be technologically programmed to only accept the owner as a user of the device to avoid second party misuse of the device.

You can invent electronic devices which bypass most of the security measures installed but preventing stealing, criminal activity, and enemy espionage is an ongoing cat and mouse game which hopefully the government will win and ensure trustworthy communications for the individual citizen everywhere in the nation or world.

One final communication. For world government to succeed there will also have to be a position of WORLD SUPREME INFORMATION GATHERER. This human will have to have an international reputation as a just and impartial judge worldwide. Countries of the world will vote in favor of or against such a human with proportional voting rights based on their nations population. Thus the most populous nations would have larger voting rights than the less populous ones.

This WORLD SUPREME INFORMATION GATHERER would have all the financial information on all the organizations and citizens in a country anywhere in the world and would analyze the information for criminal or illegal activity. Upon finding such criminal or illegal activity the country in question would be notified and asked to take legal action against those national or international criminals working or operating out of the country.

If the country does not take legal action against the criminal or illegal activity then economic sanctions could be taken or a threat to impoverish the country could be made. No military force is necessary to coerce that country into compliance.

Money is power and the threat of its loss should be enough to get the criminal promoting country in line.

How do you get the United States, Europe, China, and Russia to agree on a World Supreme Information Gatherer? There must be a worldwide secular moral code in all the above countries to make it possible. As long as the leadership in any country is not willing to institute the moral code in the country for all its citizens and the leadership included there will be no unity of opinion in the world and a trustworthy judging leader is not possible.

A repeat of the necessary worldwide moral code. Don’t destroy biodiversity, don’t lie, don’t be inefficient, don’t steal, don’t commit adultery if married, and don’t murder!!!!!!

If you liked this evergreen blog read more of them and read one or more of my evergreen books, especially COMMON SENSE.