I do not believe that religion is the “culprit” in our culture. I do believe certain cultures, organizations and individuals use religion as an excuse not to change behavior after a fact is discovered. Since faith is based on the unknown and there are no facts to dispute a belief, it would be acceptable to have faith and beliefs. It is also acceptable to believe things not yet proven; from a scientific perspective the objective is to prove what is unproven, therefore you have to first believe in something or at least have a hypothesis before you can prove it to be true or false.
For thousands of years we have been taught certain truths in our cultures – many of which are based on our capacity to believe them to be true without evidence to support them. As we learn and become aware of facts and are provided evidence of these facts, we have to decide how we will react to these new facts. Humans are very stubborn by nature and to say “what you thought you knew is now wrong,” just doesn’t settle well on individual or organized levels. We apply many of our own standards based on what we individually or collectively want (and in some cases, those are based on fact); those who live in those cultures accept, endure or revolt against those standards or they go to another culture that aligns with their own personal standards.
From an organizational standpoint, if an organization wants the individuals within it to believe and comply with something, it has to be either substantiated by facts, beliefs or the organization’s collective desire. And any organization has the capacity to manipulate any fact or belief to achieve the desire the organization’s stakeholders.
So our challenge is … As facts are discovered that fly in the face of our own accepted behavior and beliefs, how will we react to incorporate those facts into an agreed upon definition of a moral balance that is consistent across all individuals and organizations?
FACT: Something that is evidenced and proven to be true.
BELIEF: Something that is not evidenced and proven to be true, but is by faith accepted as a truth.
NEED: Something that is required based on a fact.
WANT: A desire that has the potential to be fulfilled if actions are taken towards achieving it.
AUTORESPONSE: A behavior that naturally occurs (not based on choice) and cannot be changed at this point in time.
MORAL BALANCE: A measure by a conscious being of what behaviors are acceptable based on facts and beliefs.
RULE: A non-autoresponse action that must be complied with based on facts and/or beliefs to achieve a need or want as defined by a conscious being.
CONSIOUS BEING: Individual living organism that is aware of its actions.
UNCONSIOUS BEING: Individual living organism that is not aware of its actions and acts purely on autoresponse.
• When a fact dispels a belief or makes a belief morally unbalanced
• When a fact is discovered evidencing that the consequences of a desired or accepted behavior have a negative impact on a moral balance
• When a rule is established based on a previously accepted belief, fact or want and is dispelled by a newly discovered fact
1. If a newly learned fact dispels an existing accepted behavior or belief, how do we make it something we behaviorally want to incorporate, make it necessary, or how does it become an autoresponse to apply it?
2. How do we balance our behaviors to continuously apply the expanding volume of facts and the remaining beliefs passed down through our cultures?
3. How do we determine the extent we should change behavior based on a newly acquired fact?
4. How and where do we apply those newly acquired facts to maintain moral balance across all of the following:
• Non-living organisms
• Living organisms
o Conscious beings
o Unconscious beings
o Organized conscious beings (government, businesses, religions, etc.)
5. What is considered a harmonious moral balance between want, facts, beliefs, non-living organisms, and living organisms?
6. How do we incorporate facts within a culture, while respecting the origin of the culture that was not provided the previous knowledge upon its inception?
• The question of whether an action or result(s) of an action of an individual or organized conscious being is morally balanced is not always considered before an action is taken.
• Conscious beings naturally act and react based on personal desire and need, not on the sum of the organized conscious beings or total environment that may be impacted by the conscious being’s action.