Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00225)

Chuck wrote:

>Wrong.  Conscience is something created by social conditioning for the
purpose
>of making the individual fit in with their society.  Other than that it
serves
>no purpose whatsoever.

Then please explain why some young children, being raised in the same
household, appear to exhibit different types of conscience.  For example,
one sibling may show no horror at kicking a small dog, yet another of their
siblings would never do such a thing, is very upset at the siblings
behavior, and would rather spend time petting the dog rather than kicking it.

If conscience is ONLY developed after social conditioning, why the
difference between people at very early ages - even with exposure to the
same ideas?

Or, for that matter, why, if conscience is ONLY developed after social
conditioning, do so many adult people have such varying types of conscience?

>As to the role of it in other aspects of life, I might point out the example
>of a man who had no conscience about killing whatsoever and yet was a very
>talented artist, a brilliant writer and attained enlightenment in a single
>lifetime, the Japanese Sword Saint Musashi who killed at least 60 men in
>single combat and wrote one of the best tactical manuals around.

I know nothing about the Japenese Sword Saint Musashi; however, there seems
to be a grand difference in thought processes when killing for sake of
combat than killing for sake of killing.  It sounds as though, from the
little stated above, that Saint Musashi only killed during combat - combat,
itself, contains a moral foundation.  So, his conscience could still have
been his guide.

Furthermore, when you speak of his "enlightenment" I am curious on just
what that means - what do you mean he attained "enlightenment?"

>The idea that the universe is responsive to any human value system is an
>absurdity and any idea that it would actually care about individual human
>behavior is laughable.

I agree about the universe being unresponsive to any human value system for
the universe is not human.  A bull frog is not human and does not concern
itself with human morality.  Humans are not bull frogs and do not apply the
moral laws of bull frogs in judging their behavior.  Logical.

However, you failed to address how ONLY the intellect is the best way.  You
speak of how the "creation" of a conscience serves only to keep people in
control; however, in what way would adhering only to the intellect prevent
that same danger?  Since we are all born with differing intellects,
including mental retardation and other "non-efficent" types of brain
function, how would valuing only the intellect ensure complete freedom for
humanity?


Kym