Category Archives: obedience

The game

 

One night my conscience challenged my rational mind, to a dual. The only way it could, in a dream. I did not realize this was the source of the dream until well into the game.

The game began with simple rules.

‘Empaths'(non-psychopaths) were to be tested. The object of the game was to demonstrate that ‘the conscience’ was too fragile to be a primary force in the real world. That the coherence of society was just momentum. The momentum of complex multi generational knowledge transfer.

It was set in an abandoned building surrounded with clearing and then wilderness.

The rules were as follows.

  1. The empaths had to be, and act like, children. In other word the quality or power of their emotional quotient (EQ) was the only factor for their internal morality. They were under developed and had little or no experience dealing with terror, starvation, and lack of other base needs. Kids were around age eight to ten.
  2. The empaths had no resources. (food, water, rest) All resources had to be taken from other empaths.
  3. I would be the only adult empath. The only fully developed conscience in the entire game.
  4. There were many children, at least eight.
  5. There would be rational actors. Enforcers, and one young adult talker, my counterpart. The talkers role was to explain the rules to the children and myself, and call enforcers if the rules weren’t followed. He clearly wanted to win. He spoke aggressively and struck fear in all.
  6. I could not physically interfere. I had enough talent to fight and beat the enforcers (numerous and robotic in reaction, with some exploitable handicaps), but not with a panicked child in tow. I could only convince the children, I couldn’t drag them.
  7. Two children were ordered to kill each other each night. The winner was then paired up with another child the next night.
  8.  I had once resource. A plant grew that would restore my health for one day but make me hallucinate 10% of the time. Cumulative. It was fatal poison to children.
  9.  I had to save more than one child to win.

I won on the second night.

How many children died?

One. The first two children were selected and threatened by the talker. I used every trick I knew to convince the first child(let’s call him Angel) not to fight, but terror of the unknown convinced Angel he had to kill to survive as directed.

I convinced his first designated victim/opponent (Charles for simplicity) not to fight. Charles did not subconsciously understand the problem, or had exclusively positive experiences with adults, and trusted me. This was done in earshot of Angel. Once Once Charles’s commitment to non-violence and escape was obvious Angel acted. While being egged on by the talker, Angel killed Charles with a provided sword.

I was distraught. I had failed to save the second child. The first had done something terrible. Angel ate and slept, and I wept.

I ate some plant to retain my strength of mind. The hallucinations reinforced my sense of urgency.

When he woke, I continued to try and convince Angel he was was wrong after the first death and failed. The other children, who were in earshot, became convinced that he couldn’t be swayed. His commitment to death was now an unstoppable force. Without speaking, they signaled to me as a group. Intuitively, I knew they had decided to flee.

I distracted Angel as the children gathered by an exit. Then we fled as one, without angel. They followed me to safety as I fought the enforcers off of them successfully. They couldn’t explain why they made this choice. I didn’t expect them to make it. It was not discussed. It was made by their conscience without my direct programming (as parents do).

The contest ended so Angel was released and survived, with terrible emotional damage.

The challenge had ended. What was demonstrated. Emapthy is superior against risk to the rational mind. But only with negative examples.

What can this dream, turned thought experiment, teach us? Protect freedom of speech. Neither force, nor experience could save even one child, but they could save themselves. If their consciences were exposed to the whole brutal truth, they knew the path to safety. Only the truth can protect us from those who would pit us against each other.

Obedience

Obey

‘I was just following my superior’s orders’ – Nuremberg principle IV

Is obedience a virtue?  It certainly is treated as such by some.   Obedience may bring to mind strict parents or the rank and file of the military.   Certainly some good has come from both.  It seems to contradict the idea that the human right to fork or to walk away from and split with authority is valid at all.  With some exploration of the word and it’s uses for good, it becomes clear that humanty’s understanding of obedience must be a misnomer.

To answer this we need to look at what virtue itself is about.  A virtue is personal attribute (transitory or not) that reflects both morality and accomplishment.  In other words a person with an accomplishment behind them that deems them worthy of respect (Please see an earlier post for exploration of that word.)  Morality is of course some variation of conscionable behavior.

The very concept of obedience falls apart as a virtue.  The conscience as defined by civgene (psychopaths as our predecessors) indicates that moral thought is comprised of reason (defined), and the metamind part of reason will always be subconscious. A virtue must include both parts of reason (the hunch and rational thought.)  With enough time, your gut will contradict your orders, and unrationalized obedience becomes a vice.

I’m not saying the obedience has no place in civilization.  The lions share of humans may be empaths, but we share the world with psychopaths.  Psychopaths lash out at a world which rejects their master/slave model.  They can be treated well with the right considerations and restrictions, but they will never participate in self contained cooperation.  They simply lack the tools.

To share a particular mission with psychopaths we need to revert to their way of thinking, temporally.  The oath is the solution to this conundrum.  To the psychopath the oath has no subconscious impact, just more master/slave orders to follow, but to the emapth it is ceding one’s personal conscience to a self realized principle.  The consequences of disobedience tie directly back to that oath.    When orders conflict with oath, the commander has broken the very respect upholding the oath has earned him.  He is no longer acting in a virtuous way.

So when an empath follows orders from a parent or a commander, that right to fork is only temporally, voluntarily, ignored.  You can be obedient to an open principle, but no human owns your destiny, except you.  Your conscience owns immoral orders as if they were your own mistakes.   Abusing your conscience in any fashion slowly destroys your understanding of right and wrong.  Morally dubious orders program your subconscious with false risks, crippling your abilty to think in a complete way.  You become oblivious to danger at all levels.  Your temporary submission to achieve the goals of your mission, has made you less capable, which in turn endangers it.

An immoral parent with a gambling addiction may corral you into friends that take money management lightly, a mentor may exploit you sexually as payment for hard to come by experience, and a commander may demand you kill people who pose no violent threat to anyone.  Please consider the respect you have, and may one day be afforded by your society.  That respect reflects your virtues, including operating under oath, and refusing to operate when that oath is violated.

Specifically on children, they and parents have an unwritten oath.  Society demands it, for it’s own good.  The parent genuinely emparts their understanding of the world, and the child genuinely incorporates it into their metamind as their starting point.  A way to get by until their metamind begins adapting to their own experiences.   Forming an understanding of how to invest in themselves and their world without being taken, robbed or crushed in any number of ways.  Children are not slaves to be exploited.  The legitimate oath is by design, temporary, conditional, and only fully functional when perpetually transitional towards functional adulthood.

Psychopaths only compete and never cooperate.  They do not obey moral principles, only hierarchy.  We have some distance to travel before they can be identified and are never given authority over data or other human beings.  They may recite an oath aloud, but it’s up to you to make sure they follow it.  You do yourself, them and humanity as a whole a service when you shun disloyalty to a moral oath.  That is what an oath is for.  A bridge between two groups of humans who behave as two different sets.  Shunning externally simulates the metamind for those without one.   Immediate direct consequence is the only way to impart moral principles to those without conscience.

An oath can externally recreate the functionality of a meta-psychopath for a group of otherwise principled humans.  A conditional temporary suspension of personal reason to well thought out societal rationalizations.  Just obedience is possible if a moral oath is served with integrity.  Obedience need not be slavery, but in the absence of moral thought, it surely is.

Edit: Typo