We have to build a far more assertive code than moral relativism offers. Furthermore, such a code will only be considered acceptable in today’s world if it integrates and harmonizes our world view—that is Science, our best model of reality—with the values code itself. Until they are one way of thinking. Even then, many ways of life will be possible, and many of those could be used to equip a human society to flourish. Harmonizing them all—peacefully—is what will be required of us if we are going to survive. The huge task of maximizing our species’ potential by creating a new, radically democratic way of life is daunting. Falling back on traditional ways is so much more comforting. But the depth of our fear of change is just a measure of how free we really are.

We can already see that some values don’t work. In today’s world, with the weapons we now have, both values that encourage militarism and values that create moral inertia are not survival-oriented. We have to find a third way. Not a return to one of the traditional moral codes, but not moral relativism either. Reason is our way out of this dilemma: a carefully put together moral code that all of us can agree on because it is grounded in evidence that all of us can see in physical reality. That is the way of Science, the way of Reason. 

 A universal moral code would not end the diversity of cultures on this planet; it would simply provide a means by which we could settle disputes between cultures without having to go to war. Through art, sport, commerce, intermarriage, and other nonviolent means - international law if all else fails - the integration of cultures could take place. The theory is sound. Gradually, all nations would cease to be adversaries because they would be one culture. We can build a new world —vigorous, evolving, peaceful, and beautiful.

   

                                          Artist’s conception of a park area inside a space station 

                                              (credit: Donald Davis, via Wikimedia Commons)

For now, however, we must return to our main line of thought.

We have arrived at the step in our reasoning showing that all of a society’s morés are implicit in its world view. We have also dealt with the war digression. Now we can move on to explain how some worldviews of the past have shaped the lives of whole peoples and then, at last, to our worldview, the worldview of Science, and what that worldview is implying for us.

Notes

1. Layne Cameron, Nora Lewin, “Social Status Has Impact on Overall Health of Mammals,” Michigan State University Today, March 12, 2015. http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2015/social-status-has-impact-on-overall-health-of-mammals/?utm_source=weekly-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=standard-promo&utm_content=image.

2. Dr. Stephen J. Cimbala, “War-Fighting Deterrence: Forces and Doctrines in U.S. Policy,” Air & Space Power Journal (May–June, 1983).  http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1983/may-jun/cimbala.htm.

3. “Benito Mussolini,” Wikiquote, the Free Quote Compendium. Accessed April 21, 2015. http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini.