Principals of Flexibility verses Rigid Moral Codes
by Richard Schwartz

The following are principles that I think far outweigh the many mentally stagnated, and subsequently enforced, rigid codes, despite their interpreted as superior by those who endorse them. I think its fair to say that I interpret these principles far superior to ethical and moral codes that enforce conformity to one particular collective group decision or creed, in what I perceive to be answers for universal and global unity and peaceful co-existence. Each culture is defined by its group, its value system, its religious ideals, while language unconsciously interprets, distorts or refines - which ever you decide it to be, yet ultimately language confines meanings within the framework of the particular culture it is in within, while historicity itself molds and restrains each and every thought, imprisoned within its frame of reference. And the social conditioning of freedom and control can be on either end of the spectrum, depending on the social structure, citizens and government. Ultimately, it is when such reference points are interpreted as one-sided truths, is when fundamentalism and absolutism clashes with other peoples and cultures. For this, any particular cultural, social, religious and philosophical codes and reference points must stand in their relative positions. And it is here that I reject them as absolutes in favor of the values I list below.

1. The Psyche of each individual person and its subsequent unique, individual growth. This is not the same as the intellectual level, however intellect certainly plays a major part, perhaps wisdom is much more accurate word. The psyche itself contains multiple facets including the intellect, reason, the sublimation of energies, along with the perception of knowledge, which exists beyond discursive thinking. Some have defined it as the natural mind that exists in the gaps or spaces between thoughts. This can be found in Carl Jung’s writings as in an area of non-linguistic imagery, consisting in symbols and metaphors, or archetypes, in what he calls the collective unconscious, which also can be found in much Eastern thought. In his description, it is imperative that tolerance and the democratic need of autonomy are existent, where each individual can grow on his or her own terms, where morals and ethical codes (to degrees, of course) are not enforced.

However, what must be supplied and maintained, are the right conditions for the autonomy of each individual psyche to grow to higher levels. Just as you cannot force a plant to grow, you can supply the adequate soil, moisture and sunlight. It is then you must back away and allow the plant on its own terms to decide how and when it will grow. This is crucial in human development and I think any psychologically mature parent knows this of his children. If you force your values, no matter how seemingly right they appear, you will meet severe resistance. Repression can subdue, but almost always regresses when autonomy is eventually achieved, thus there is no growth, nor expansion of conscious development in areas that transcend the fundamental polarities of absolutes. And in the case of nationalism and religious values, the repression of autonomy in conformation of enforced values almost always ends in warfare and bloodshed, which remains as prominent and continual. Repression can only contain control for temporary periods of time, while autonomous growth of the individual psyche can produce permanent, lasting affects of unity and peaceful existence.

2. Pragmatism, the concept from philosophers William James, John Dewey, Richard Rorty and others. What must be understood is that all truths are relative and are defined only within the position we are standing in. No matter how much logic, scripture, reasoning and science you attempt to prove, all truths are only the best set of lies or the truth that fits the individual circumstances and relative position. This is because all knowledge is based on language, history, cultural conditioning and the social conditioning of what constitutes the most beneficial balance between individualism and collectivism. There is much written on this, but the main point here is that pragmatism recognizes that every person has absolutes that differ from one another and that peaceful planetary co-existence from both the human and environmental standpoints require privatization in absolutes, that is the compartmentalization of all beliefs that exist outside the ideas of unity, peace and holistic and integral harmony. Such values must be compartmentalized. The values of individual’s absolutes must be allowed, in that the individual psyche can only grow in autonomous freedom. What is presented on the drawing tables of nations, peoples and cultures must be the values that promote peace, harmony and yet allow the autonomy for individuals to privatize and compartmentalize their absolutes, while promoting other absolutes within the degrees of relativity. There are fine lines here and degrees of multiplicity. What is crucial, is not the idea of evil over good, but transcending above the polarities.

3. Unity from diversity, as found in Plato, Plotinus, the Illuminati, Freemasons and Thomas Jefferson. Like the above two factors, unity is, that is unity in it’s non-repressive essence, which in reality is the only real type of lasting and permanent unity, can only be found from diversity. And such diversity can only be maintained with allowance and tolerance of individual autonomy, which is the autonomous psyche. When governments and religions enforce values and remove autonomy, as stated above, the psyche cannot grow, whereas repression can only control in superficial levels that usually have severe consequences, manifesting themselves in violent and emotionally destructive ways, individually, culturally and socially. Repressive measures only act as temporary restraints and never raise the levels of human conscious development. It was Plotinus who described beauty as the form in symmetry from the diversity, which unifies into a whole that can be perceived as beautiful.

In the formation of the United States, it was Thomas Jefferson, the rationalist and bible deist (rationalism recognizing the “Good,” minus all supernaturalism), who opposed the conservative ethics of Alexander Hamilton in that unity from diversity is as above and not with puritan ethics and conservative values enforced on society. The meaning of democracy lives outside of capitalism, Marxism, socialism and many other venues. Democracy is meant to embrace diversity in autonomy. It is here that the diverse multiplicity of individuals then symmetrically forms into a whole, a unity, that harmonizes into a peaceful existence of symphonic beauty, which raises society and cultural existence into higher meaningful expressions.

In first century Christianity, it was various gnostics Christians, such as Valentinus, who endorced unity from diversity, while Irenaeus labeled such as heresy and from Satan, attacking all that did not conform to orthodoxy in one uniform interpretation that only embraced the 4 gospels over the many others, who fought against subjective human experience. The problem with one code, one set of writings is that eliminates the true subjective human experience of autonomous inspirations that bring creativity and artistic achievement in art, philosophy, intellectual creativity and so forth. Thus the psyche is stagnated with one formula for all to follow in fear of change and uncertainty, while only such uncertainty and relativity in ambiguous means with the courage to be can develop the psyche of humanity to expand into areas of higher, open, inclusive, integral achievements.

4. Compassion as found in almost all religious traditions and it’s mystical branches. You will find such teachings in Christ’s “golden rule” (not in biblical literalism and/or organized religion) and that of the Dalai Lama, the interpreted reincarnation of compassion. This is different from pity, which results in condescending attitudes of what is perceived as superior to the inferior, for compassion consists in empathy; the ability to mentally, emotionally and perceptionally, enter into another persons situation from their subjective standpoint. It is here that one’s own conceptual views and objectivity are dissolved in the framework of the other’s subjectivity and subsequent diverse views and choices of actions that differ from our own. The idea is compassion becomes the intention, which culminates into charity and attitudes of patience, tolerance and understanding. Compassion can be used as an internal tool to combat the emotions of anger, jealously, competitive aggression and so forth. It is the idea that these destructive emotions are the results of internal grasping or attachments to desires. Rather than simply experiencing the joys of whatever it is that we so find enjoyable, we try to grasp on to such for possession. This is what forfeits our compassion, and our own internal peace for that matter. So in this alternative of letting go and releasing our desires with compassion, we are enabled to overcome the negative emotions, which subsequently results in actions of charity, tolerance and the movement toward holistic and integral unity, that of peaceful and harmonious existence between multiple cultures, values and perceptions.