Our Values--How They Develop

By Dr. Bob O'Connor

We are our values--but what are they? Are they based on our self-centered assumptions, on what we think that God wants, or on what we think is best for society? Are our values related to our genes? How much? How much does our intrauterine environment affect our values and behavior? How important is our childhood in forming our values? Can we evaluate and change our values?

In recent elections have the people voted for values that will make their lives better? Have they voted for the people who will make society better? Will the Supreme Court make the best decisions on health care and abortion? With every American owing over $80,000 dollars on the $25 trillion-dollar national debt, is there a way out? Will Americans keep voting for reduced taxes-- with the bill for the taxes continually being added to the national debt? With the $260 billion in interest that Americans pay annually to our creditors, like China and Japan, could that money have been better spent on infrastructure? But we don't like to pay taxes! Why do Americans pay 40% more for health care than any other country? Why does America have the 37th best health care system?-- the worst of any developed country?

Our values invade every facet of our lives. Should we try understand them--and US?

• Language: English
• Publisher: Total Health Publications
• Release date: Nov 12, 2020
• ISBN: 9798201554248

Dr. Bob O'Connor

   Dr. O'Connor is a native of Los Angeles--having grown up in the "ghetto" of South-Central LA. His parents had eighth grade educations. His father died when the author was eight years old. This forced the family onto the welfare rolls while his mother went to school to learn clerical skills.    Dr. O'Connor's university education was at UCLA where he earned a BS and Master's degree and did two years of doctoral level work. He then changed his major and his university, gaining his doctorate at the University of Southern California--in philosophical and social foundations of education.    His interest in travel led to living and teaching in New Zealand, India, Canada and the Netherlands, culminating in a twenty year residence in Norway.    His experience in various cultures has prompted many of the ideas and questions he presents in the book.

Book preview

Dr. Bob O’Connor

Copyright  2020

––––––––

Total Health Publications

TABLE OF CONTENTS—HYPERLINKED

CHAPTER 1  WHERE ARE WE GOING?

OUR IDENTITIES INDICATE OUR VALUES

OUR BEHAVIOR IS BASED LARGELY ON OUR VALUES

THINKING THROUGH OUR VALUES

BASIC ASSUMPTIONS—THE START OF OUR THINKING

UNCONSCIOUS INFLUENCES ON OUR THINKING

AND DEEPER STILL

APPLYING EVIDENCE TO THE MIX

AND SO—

SECTION I  AN INTRODUCTION TO CHOOSING

CHAPTER  2  LOOKING FOR HAPPINESS —A REASON FOR THE VALUES WE CHOOSE

VALUES

SOME CONFLICTS IN WHAT IS VALUED

WE MUST THINK MORE DEEPLY—AND UNDERSTAND OUR THINKING

LET’S UNDERSTAND THE PRESENT, BUT IMPROVE THE FUTURE!

CHAPTER 3  OUR BASIC ASSUMPTIONS—THE FOUNDATIONS OF OUR VALUES

THE GOD-BASED ASSUMPTIONS

ASSUMPTIONS OF SCIENCE

MORE ON ASSUMPTIONS

SELF CENTERED VALUES

SECTION II  SELF-CENTERED CHOICES

CHAPTER  4  SELF-CENTERED ASSUMPTIONS

CHOOSING FOR NOW OR TOMORROW

FREEDOM

MAKING STUPID CHOICES

SECTION III  PHYSIOLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON WHAT APPEAR TO BE SELF-CENTERED VALUE CHOICES

CHAPTER  5  THE EFFECTS OF GENETICS AND EPIGENETICS ON THINKING AND VALUE CHOOSING

CHANGES BEFORE BIRTH CAN EXPLAIN LATER BEHAVIOR OR THINKING

UNDERSTANDING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PATHS TAKEN TO COPE

CHAPTER  6  PHYSICAL MECHANISMS DIRECTING OUR MINDS

BIOLOGICAL FACTORS

Genetics

Epigenetics

DNA

RNA

Chromosomes

A QUICK BIT OF BRAIN ANATOMY

THE PREFRONTAL CORTEX

NEUROTRANSMITTERS

EXCITATORY NEUROTRANSMITTERS

GLUTAMATE

DOPAMINE

NOREPINEPHRINE

CALMING NEUROTRANSMITTERS

GABA

SEROTONIN

HORMONES

TESTOSTERONE

OXYTOCIN

CORTISOL

Chapter  7  THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR Genes ON OUR THINKING

GENES

INSTINCTS

A GENE-MIND CONNECTION?

CHAPTER  8  EPIGENETICS AND THINKING

HORMONE METHYLATION

STRESS HORMONES CAN CAUSE EPIGENETIC CHANGES

POSSIBLE CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF SOME EPIGENETIC CHANGES

HOW LONG MIGHT EPIGENETIC CHANGES LAST?

EPIGENETIC MECHANISMS

GENE MUTATION IN THE BRAIN MAY BE EARLY CLUE TO AUTISM

EPIGENETICS AND DEPRESSION

EPIGENETIC TRANSFERS FROM ANCESTORS

CHAPTER  9  EARLY LIFE STRESSES AFFECT OUR VALUE CHOOSING

SECTION  IV  A LAST LOOK AT SELF-CENTERED VALUES

WHAT HAS THIS GOT TO DO WITH VALUES?

Chapter  10  EFFECTS ON THE FETUS FROM THE intrauterine environment

STRESSES

THE PLACENTA

ANXIETY

LEGAL DRUGS

PSYCHO-ACTIVE DRUGS

Nicotine

Alcohol

Fetal alcohol syndrome

ILLEGAL DRUGS

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER  11  PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND DRIVES AS AIDS OR IMPEDIMENTS TO CLEAR THINKING

A BRIEF LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF MOTIVATION

MASLOW'S THEORY OF A HIERARCHY OF NEEDS

META NEEDS

ESTEEM NEEDS

LOVE NEEDS

SAFETY NEEDS

PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS

CHAPTER  12  OUR MAJOR MOTIVATION—POWER—AND ITS EFFECT ON OUR VALUE CHOOSING FREEDOM

THE DRIVE FOR POWER

IDENTITY

POSITIVE  IDENTITIES

MEANINGLESS UNEARNED IDENTITIES

NEGATIVE IDENTITIES

CHAPTER 13  CHOOSING OUR VALUES

UNDERSTANDING THE

BEHAVIOR OF OURSELVES AND OTHERS

FEW UNDERSTAND THE BASES OF THEIR BELIEFS!

PSYCHOLOGICAL SOURCES OF BEHAVIOR

VALUES AND BEHAVIOR

SELF-CENTERED VALUES

SELF-CENTERED VALUES FOR PRESENT OUTCOMES OR FUTURE OUTCOMES?

GOD-BASED VALUES

SOCIETY-BASED VALUES

CONFLICTS IN VALUES

JUSTIFYING VALUE DECISIONS

PSYCHOLOGIAL GROUNDS FOR VALUE CHOICES

LOGICAL EVIDENCE BASED GROUNDS FOR VALUE CHOICES

ABORTION

THE FETUS IS NOT A PERSON—AND IS NOT SACRED

A FETUS IS NOT YET A PERSON—ONLY THE PROPERTY OF THE HUSBAND

GOD IS NOT PRO-LIFE

SHOULD CHRISTIAN ADVOCATES SPEND MORE TIME ADVOCATING WHAT THE BIBLE HAS ACTUALLY APPROVED?

SLAVERY

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

CHAPTER  14  CHOOSING APPROPRIATE VALUES IN ADJUSTING TO PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS AND STRESSES

Handling our Mental Pressures

THE EFFECTS OF UNHEALTHY STRESS ON THE PERSON

FOR ADULTS

TEEN-AGE AND YOUNG ADULTS

GOOD STRESS AND BAD STRESS

The General Adaptation Syndrome

OUR HANDLING OF STRESSORS

COPING WITH STRESSES

Meditation

THINKING OUR WAY TO REDUCING OR ELIMINATING OUR DISTRESSES

The Scientific Method of Problem Solving

And so!

WHO ARE YOU?

And some points to ponder:

CHAPTER  15  BEING LOVED UNSELFISHLY AND ITS EFFECT ON OUR VALUE CHOOSING

WHAT IS LOVE?

THE KINDS OF LOVE

THE NEED FOR LOVE

HOW LOVE DEVELOPS

THE INGREDIENTS OF LOVE

THE CAUSES OF ABNORMAL BEHAVIOR

A QUICK REVIEW OF OUR NERVE SYSTEMS

MENTAL PROBLEMS

Learning how to cope

ADJUSTING TO STRESS

NORMALITY

EVERYONE MAKES ADJUSTMENTS

DEFENSE MECHANISMS

THE FIGHT SYNDROME

THE ATTACK MECHANISMS

WHY ATTACK?

THE FLIGHT SYNDROME

FORGETTING REALITY

DISTORTING  REALITY

ATONING FOR REALITY

RETREATING FROM REALITY

MASLOW'S THEORY OF COPING MECHANISMS

MENTALLY HEALTHY VALUES

CHAPTER  17  MAKING SELF-CENTERED DECISIONS

SECTION 5  GOD BASED ASSUMPTIONS

CHAPTER 18  ASSUMING A SUPREME BEING

WHAT IS GOD LIKE?

CHAPTER  19  THEISM

PROOFS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

A FIRST MOVER OR AN UNCAUSED CAUSE

ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

THE ARGUMENT OF DESIGN

IS AMERICA A CHRISTIAN NATION?

WHO GETS TO GO TO HEAVEN?

CHAPTER  20  DEISM

CHAPTER  21  PANTHEISM AND PANENTHEISM

CHAPTER  33

AGNOSTICISM

CHAPTER  23  ATHEISM

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

STATE CHURCHES SUPPORTED BY ATHEISTS

EDUCATION AND ATHEISM

WHO BECOMES AN ATHEIST?

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS—FOR AMERICA

BUT LOOK TO THE INSPIRATION OF RELIGIONS!

CHAPTER  24  SATANISM

SECTION  VI  AN IDEA OF A BETTER SOCIETY AS A BASIC ASSUMPTION

World's Happiest Countries (2019)

CHAPTER 25  YOUR SOCIETAL ASSUMPTIONS

ETHICAL IDEAS AND OUR VIEW OF SOCIETAL VALUES

UTOPIAS AS GOALS FOR SOCIETY

CONSTRUCTING AN IDEAL SOCIETY

Fundamental principles of an ideal modern society

JUSTICE

VARYING LAWS GIVE US FEW HINTS OF THE ESSENCE OF JUSTICE

EQUALITY

ARE PEOPLE ACTUALLY EQUAL?

WHAT ABOUT THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE?

THE IDEAL OF EQUALITY

LIBERTY

LICENSE

LIBERTY VERSUS EQUALITY

EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY

PREJUDICE CAN BE POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE, RATIONAL OR IRRATIONAL

RACIAL AND RELIGIOUS PREJUDICES

SOME FUTURISTIC IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY

CONFLICTS OF SOCIETAL VALUES

MORE QUESTIONS

SELFISH CAPITALISM OR LOVING SOCIALISM—DO WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE OPTIONS?

WELFARE STATE POSSIBILITIES

USING GOD’S LAWS FOR SOCIETY

CHAPTER  26  CONSIDERING THE TYPES OF POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS YOU MIGHT CHOOSE TO VALUE

THE HONG KONG TRANSFER

THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION

TYPE OF GOVERNMENT

AUTOCRACY

PLUTOCRACY OR OLIGARCHY

REPUBLIC

REPUBLIC BY COALITION

TWO PARTY SYSTEMS

MONEY AND IDENTITY CONTROL THE PARTIES

ELECTIONS

DEMONSTRATIONS TO EXPRESS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE

VOTING

DEMOCRACY

HOW SHOULD WE USE THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS?

SHOULD WE ELECT ONLY COMPETENT AND CONCERNED LEGISLATORS AND ADMINISTRATORS

HEALTH CARE INITIATIVES

WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE COUNTRY?

CHAPTER 27  CONSIDERING THE ECONOMIC SYSTEMS IN YOUR VALUE CHOICES

FUNCTIONS OF THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM

FEUDAL-LIKE SYSTEMS

PRIVATE CAPITALISM

DO I WANT A MORE CARING SOCIETY OR A SELFISH DOG EAT DOG SOCIETY?

Financial support (government, bank loans, bond, stock ownership)

ENTREPRENEURIALISM

STATE CAPITALISM

SOCIALISM

COMMUNISM

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY—WISHES VERSUS. THE REAL WORLD

CHAPTER  28  CHOOSING A WELFARE STATE AS A SOCIETAL ASSUMPTION

THE HAPPIEST CITIES IN THE WORLD

WHY ARE SOCIAL WELFARE NATIONS AND CITIES HAPPIER?

WORKERS’ RIGHTS

PRISON POPULATION

THE IDEAL OR THE TRADITIONAL

Who controls ownership of the product or services?

CHAPTER  29  PAYING THE BILLS FOR THE PEOPLE’S WISHES—ITS IMPORTANCE IN SOCIETAL VALUES

How is it all paid for?

IMMEDIATE TAXES

2.  DELAYED TAXES

DEVALUING THE CURRENCY AND  tightening the budget

PARTIAL OR TOTAL GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIES

SOCIALIST WELFARE STATE FINANCING—GOVERNMENT OWNING SOME OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION—FOR THE GOOD OF THE PEOPLE

PUBLICLY HELD BUSINESSES

PRIVATIZATION OF STATE-OWNED INDUSTRIES

WHY THE NEED TO PRIVATIZE?

Margaret Thatcher in the UK—PRIVATIZATION

UK government debt as a percentage of GDP, financial year ending 1980 to financial year ending 2014.

UNITED STATES

CHINA

SWEDEN

HAS ANYBODY THOUGHT ABOUT RUNNING A COUNTRY EFFICIENTLY—OR IS THE ONLY IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION THE NEXT ELECTION?

PARTIAL PRIVATIZATION

Pro-privatization

ANTI-PRIVATIZATION

REDUCING STATE EXPENSES

GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS AND NEEDS THAT ARE SOMETIMES PRIVATIZED

Union growth and decline comparisons

SOME COMPARISONS OF GOVERNMENTS

PER CAPITA SHARE OF NATIONAL DEBT

WHAT ARE COUNTRIES GETTING FROM THEIR TAXES

WHERE ELSE CAN WE FIND THE MONEY FOR WHAT WE WANT?

CHAPTER  30  CHOOSING A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS

PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS FOR POWER AND IDENTITY—AND ADVOCATING FOR POLITICAL CAUSES

SOCIETY’S CONTROL OF YOUR CHOSEN IDENTITY AND IDEA OF YOUR FREEDOM

CHAPTER  31  CONSIDERING THE VALUES OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH

A MAJOR LIBERTY—FREEDOM OF SPEECH

THE FIRST AMENDMENT

LYING DURING POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS IS ACCEPTABLE

Donald Trump’s 2020 Campaign

FABRICATIONS ARE OFTEN FUNDAMENTAL IN AMERICAN LIFE

HOW FREE SHOULD SPEECH BE?

PROPAGANDA

CHAPTER  32  CONSIDERING THE VALUES OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION

TAX BREAKS FOR RELIGIONS

WHAT ABOUT THE FOUNDING FATHERS?

AND TODAY—ARE THERE ANY INCONSISTENCIES IN OUR THINKING?

IN EDUCATION

POLITICAL CONCERNS

BUSINESS

CHAPTER  33  WHERE DO I STAND ON THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM

WHICH PATH?—TO YOUR IDEA OF JUSTICE—OR OF HAPPINESS?

THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM

THE TRADITIONAL POLITICAL SPECTRUM

THE MODERN EMPHASIS ON EQUALITY

PEOPLE MOVE FROM ONE CATEGORY TO ANOTHER—BASED ON THE ISSUE

BUT FIRST—A LOOK AT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL SPECTRUM

A WIDER SPECTRUM

WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER

VIOLENT REACTIONARY ACTIONS—THE FAR-FAR-FAR RIGHT

REACTIONARY RIGHT'S FEAR OF WHITE GENOCIDE

LEGAL REACTIONARY PROGRAMS

THE REACTIONARY PROPAGANDISTS—THE FAR-FAR RIGHT.

THE REACTIONARIES—THE FAR RIGHT

NEOCONSERVATISM

NEOLIBERALISM

ILLUSTRATIONS OF POWER IN REACTIONARY GOVERNING

BUT IT IS COMFORTABLE BEING A REACTIONARY

CONSERVATIVES—THE RIGHT

MODERATES –THE MIDDLE

LIBERALS—THE LEFT

RADICALS—THE FAR LEFT

THE RADICAL PROPAGANDISTS—THE FAR-FAR LEFT

VIOLENT RADICAL ACTIONS—THE FAR-FAR-FAR LEFT

RATING THE PRESS IN TERMS OF THEIR BIAS

COMPARING SOME COUNTRIES

AND SO

CHAPTER 34  HOW FAR WILL YOUR SOCIETAL ASSUMPTIONS TAKE YOU?

IF A CONVENTION WERE CALLED, WHAT ISSUES MIGHT BE DISCUSSED?

CHAPTER 1  WHERE ARE WE GOING?

A few years ago, I heard a young Tea Party member interviewed on TV. He said, I’m against socialism. The interviewer asked, What is socialism? And the young man responded, I don’t know, but I’m against it.

We, in America, call the Nordic countries socialist, because their governments own 10 to 35% of the industries. Is that good or bad? In the annual United Nations happiness surveys, the Nordic countries are in the top three. The U.S. is never higher than 16th, it is 19th this year. In the Economist’s surveys on the best democracies, Nordic countries take four of the top five places. The U.S. is 25th. In the list of countries with billionaires per million people, three Nordic countries are ahead of the U.S., which is 6th on the list. In income-per-person, the U.S. is again 6th, behind three Nordic countries. In perceived corruption in the society, a Transparency International annual survey, Denmark was seen as the least corrupt, the other Nordic countries were all in the top seven, but down the list at 23, was the good old U.S. of A.

Oh ya! Since some people have health care high on their priorities, how does America fare? Well, it spends more of its gross domestic product on health care than any other country—16.9%.

For this it gets the 37th best health-care system in the world, according to the World Health Organization. France spends 11.2% of its GDP on health-care and is rated as having the best health-care system in the world.

Taking another tack, you know that the government taxes us to pay for what we, or our legislators, say they want. We pay, as immediate taxes: income taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes and property taxes. But that still isn’t enough! So our government borrows. And who owes the money? Us! So, we have a delayed tax bill. With our $27 trillion debt, each individual owes about $81,000—which amounts to about $214,000 owed per taxpayer. Other countries own parts of some of their industries. The profits reduce the taxes—but not in America, we are capitalistic. Private enterprise should take all of the profits.

Another area that may make some socially interested people question some values is in salaries. Only one national president makes more than the minimum paid National Football League rookie. The president of Switzerland makes $507,000 and the lowest paid NFL rookie makes $495,000. But if he plays two years, he will be up to a minimum of $570,000. Then there is Tom Cruise’s $70 million for Mission Impossible. But the U.S. President makes $400,000. Canada’s leader makes $290,000, Russia’s $136,000, and Mexico’s president brings in a hefty $68,000. Maybe this is why we have better films and football, than we have national and international leadership.

These are all questions of societal values.  And we have been fed a great deal of political propaganda to make us believe them. Can we think for ourselves? Should we bother?

OUR IDENTITIES INDICATE OUR VALUES

Why have Americans become so divided?  We have often adopted irrational or meaningless self-identities that absorb a good deal of our time. They may be so important to us that we become one issue voters—

›  Voting for Bush because he was a born-again Christian,

›  For Obama because he was Black,

›  For Trump because he said he would appoint judges to stop abortions, or he would build a wall to keep out immigrants.

But,

›  Bush didn’t turn the other cheek, when he went to war, on false pretenses, to kill Saddam Hussein;

›  Obama didn’t achieve as much for Blacks as Southerner Lyndon Johnson did. And,

›  Trump has not yet stopped abortions or built a wall—and Mexico has been loud and clear, that won’t pay for it.

Our identities are often straw houses in our minds that the Big Bad Wolf cannot blow down. Our commitment to save the life of a fetus may be so great that we kill adult doctors who perform abortions! Although abortion is sanctioned in the Bible (Numbers 5:11-29) and adultery is a capital crime in the Bible (Leviticus 20), evangelical one issue voters voted for an admitted multiple adulterer to obtain assurances that what they thought was in the Bible would be enacted into law.

If stopping the pregnancy of a fertilized ovum is a terrible crime, as many Catholics and evangelicals say it is, God is the major criminal! In the U.S. about one in eight pregnancies, approximately 500,000, end as miscarriages. Far more fertilized ova never implant. So the number of God-induced abortions is enormous!

Our identities can be earned, such as a priest, professor or politician. These are often meaningful in the society. There are innumerable self-centered identities that we encounter. Some are meaningful, some are meaningless, and some are harmful. These might include: Ku Klux Klan, Antifa, evangelicals, capitalists, environmentalists, some are died-in-the-wool Yankee fans.

Let’s take what we think we know about Jesus. As you know, none of the gospel writers, nor Paul, had ever seen Jesus. Biblical scholars know that Jesus was never a Christian. He was always Jewish. If he were alive today, he would probably be a reformed Jew. If for some reason he ever were to become a Christian, it would be likely that he would be in the Salvation Army. He certainly wouldn’t be a Catholic! But the rulers of the Church in Rome have been the greatest political manipulators of all time. Civilizations are lucky to last 500 years. Rome stumbled to a thousand, but the Catholic Church, by promising everlasting life, is approaching the two millennia mark and is growing strong. Poor people want to reach the kingdom or heaven. The Pope promises that they will.

As people became more educated, they threw off the bishops’ blankets and cast the cardinals out of their governments. The French Revolution was as much to escape the pressure of the theological thumb as it was to rid the country of their robbing royalty.

Aristotle wrote that after the first seven years of childhood, you would know the adult that he or she would become. Lenin thought it took eight years. Many psychologists believe that the first four years of life can predict much of a person’s mental health. With so many justices as products of Catholic educations, we understand how the basic assumptions of their lives were formed.

OUR BEHAVIOR IS BASED LARGELY ON OUR VALUES

Most of our behavior is influenced by our values. Most is based on our self-centered values. Some of our behavior is based on what we think are God-based values. The rest is based on what we believe is best for society. Your own society-based values may conflict with the realities cited above. Maybe you believe that salaries should be equalized a bit more. Maybe you believe that there are things that can be done to make your country happier or less corrupt. Maybe you believe that your country can have better health care for less money.

You may hold only a value-oriented opinion. Or, your value may be so strong that you are determined to do something about it. Should I join a political action group? Should I run for a political office? Should I pray for the country? Or, should I not worry about it and just settle into the sofa and watch some of my favorite re-runs?

THINKING THROUGH OUR VALUES

If we are to truly be homo sapiens—thinking humans, we should certainly understand what and how we think. Is everything we do well-thought-out? How much of our behavior is merely reacting? What forces have directed our life’s choices?

Mother? Father? Our religious leader? A teacher? A politician? Our travels? Our friends? Our education? The radio or television programs we experience? Our political party’s platform? Our happy or unhappy life situation? Our business interests? Our genes?

So many influences on our behavior that cloud, redirect or influence our thinking—thinking that we usually believe we have sound reasons to believe.

Oh!, but there’s more! Have you ever had a discussion about politics or religion? These are the two areas, we are told, to avoid discussing. Why? Because you are dealing with basic assumptions primarily, and with the interpretation of the evidence that each of you apply to your assumptions. If you don’t understand your own assumptions and the assumptions of the others in the discussion, you can’t have a meaningful discussion. Perhaps one of you can change the other person’s assumptions. Highly unlikely! The point is, that we must know not only our own bases for thinking, but also those with whom we shall discuss important issues. Without a deep understanding of our own views and those with whom we are discussing, we can’t really have meaningful discussions.

SO—

Do we walk the walk or merely talk the talk? Do our actions speak louder than our words? Why do we do what we do? Do we think? Have we thoroughly examined our values? After all, "they are us!"

Some people look only for pleasure in their lives. The Bible, in Ecclesiastes 8:15, tells us, Then I commended mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry, and Isaiah 22:13, provides a reason when it predicts, Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we shall die.  But, is it possible that there are other values than gluttony and drunkenness that should guide us to our graves?

How many of us happily pursue the path of pleasure as we prepare to rendezvous with the Reaper-Grim?  If this is your proclivity, you are using self-centered values. Might our paths be more fulfilling if we follow those of Mother Theresa in India or Albert Sweitzer in Africa? They were following what they believed to be God-based values. But there is another path, the society-based value path. Bill and Melinda Gates, with their philanthropy, are doing what they can to make the world’s society better. Did Donald Trump have the world society’s or America’s society’s best interests at heart when he pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement? Or was it best for his narcissistic personality’s need to feel superior?

BASIC ASSUMPTIONS—THE START OF OUR THINKING

All of our voluntary actions are based on what we value at that instant—and they may be understood as being grounded in a non-provable basic assumption. The basic assumptions are: self-centered, God-based, or society-based.

It might be offered that all of our values actions are really self-centered. The gourmet is obviously indulging himself. But, was Mother Theresa’s major motivation to get her soul to heaven? Is the motivation of the Gateses to be applauded by the masses for their generosity? I think not! But questions about why we do what we do have been with us for millennia. Philosophers and psychologists tell us that it is pursuing pleasure or happiness. Freud thought it was largely about sex. Mill thought that there were different qualities of pleasure. Modern epigenetic science indicates that many of our behaviors, and our apparent value choices, are programed by, are at least strongly influenced by, our genes and the environmental influences on them.

Donald Trump’s behavior has long been known to be the result of his narcistic personality. Books have verified the early childhood experiences that have contributed to his problem. But people, without a strong background in the psychological sciences often look for the values on which he bases his behavior. For him, the basics are in his psychological needs, not in intellectually based values.

The basic assumptions of our family and friends often takes their behavior in different directions than our own basic assumptions are taking us. And we wonder how people can be so stupid as to not agree with us! That is why we are often cautioned about arguing about politics or religion. What societal value is more important, liberty or equality? Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Is there a heaven or a hell? Is the soul implanted in the ovum at the instant of conception? These and many other unprovable ideas can be so strongly held by some that they will kill, or even start a war, to prove or protect their non-provable assumptions. The advocacy of these assumptions can have significant effects on the nation and the world.

Look at the idea that Pope Pius IX proposed in 1869, that the soul is infused in the fertilized ovum at the instant of conception. He based his pronouncement on several beliefs.

›  The sin of Adam and Eve of eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden was passed down to all people. This their Original Sin. The Catholics believe this because a bishop in North Africa, Augustine, said it was true, about 1700 years ago.

›  Both Matthew and Luke relate the story of a virgin birth. In those days no one was even remotely aware of how conception actually occurred. Neither evangelist had ever met Jesus or Mary. Still there were a number of cases of virgin births in Egyptian, Greek and other mythological-religious belief systems.

There is nothing in Christian Scriptures that mentions an immaculate conception—that Mary was born without Original Sin. In fact, the concept of Original Sin is not mentioned in the Bible. That is why Orthodox and Protestant Christians, reject the idea. However, there are so many Catholics espousing the idea that others felt there must be some truth in the idea. So without reference to the Bible, that is clear in continually stating that human life starts with birth, zealots have redefined the medical terms of embryo and fetus to be identical with infant or child. Then they used emotional pictures and videos to show parts of a fetal extraction to indicate a murder of what they call a child.

None of this emotional appeal is logical, but as we will point out often—most people are psychological, not logical. In the next volume of this work, we will look more deeply into logic. Beliefs have more chance of being true if they are empirical, that is, if the evidence can be repeated in subsequent experiments. Historical evidence must be verified from several sources, But the evidence for a soul being implanted into a fertilized ovum is merely an unverifiable opinion.

What we call thinking is commonly only trying to find evidence that backs up our opinions. When a Nobel prize winning physiologist says that there is, or is not, a God—it has about the same validity as a judge, an economist, or a high school drop-out making the same statement.

In the U.S. Supreme Court, with the approval of Justice Barrett, 78% of the Supreme Court justices will have been raised Roman Catholic. Since 22% of Americans are Catholic, it gives the reactionary and conservative views of the Church more leverage because it has developed the basic assumptions of six of the justices. It is very rare that educated people will change their basic assumptions. It appears that Justice Sotomayer has assumptions more in line with Jesus, as written in the Scriptures, than with the popes and their often-changing positions on tradition. For example, Thomas Aquinas was the acknowledged theologian of the Church for several hundred years. Following Aristotle, he declared that male babies go their souls about a month after conception, and females go theirs about a month after that. So, if the criterions for when abortion is moral depends on then the soul arrives, as Pope Pius IX decided, an abortion during the first month or two of pregnancy would be moral. But the hallowed idea of Catholic tradition took an immediate turn in 1869 and tradition started that year. So as good Catholics 6 of the 7 Catholics on the Court could make a decision counter to the earlier, well researched Roe v Wade decision.  The taxes required to educate the unwanted children born and their contribution to climate change will stay in place until future presidents have the opportunity to appoint non-reactionary judges that reflect how the majority of the citizens view their Constitution in terms of providing for the general welfare of the people.

––––––––

UNCONSCIOUS INFLUENCES ON OUR THINKING

But, not all of our positive feelings come from our value choices. They can come from our satisfaction of our psychological drives, like power, or from our emotional need to find or to give love. And some of our behavior that we may judge as being moral or immoral may have it roots in our genes or in our subconscious minds. These can often be intertwined with our values. For instance, a boy may choose to play football for a self-centered reason. It is fun. When he tackles an opponent, he feels good because his basic psychological power drive is satisfied. When he feels good because he has helped a younger player, that is a satisfaction of his emotional need to be unselfishly loving. So, our value system can be interlaced with psychological drives and emotional needs. In this book we are primarily concerned with the development of values and their possible conflicts with each other. But we will briefly explore the genetic and unconscious reasons that may be generating behavior that we may think is freely chosen, but is primarily a reaction—not a choice.

›  Why does one person value money above all else?

›  Why does another value raping or killing?

›  Why does another value teaching?

›  Why does one value preaching?

›  Why does one value suicide?

›  Why does one value bullying?

›  Why does one value parenting?

›  Why does one value playing football?

›  Why does one value watching football?

The various values that we hold and live are nearly infinite. Why do we hold such values? The reasons may be springing from our genes, the epigenetic influences on our genes, adjustments we make to our stressors, our subconscious memories, intellectual decisions, or influences on our thinking from our environment. Whatever the cause, we will have either valid reasons or invalid psychological rationalizations for what we do.

AND DEEPER STILL

We all remember John Locke’s theory of three and a half centuries ago, that we are all born with minds that are blank slates, and that we learn to become what we are after we are born. Freud believed it. Parents who want to adopt infants believe it. But it isn’t true. Influences on our thinking and behavior may actually be transmitted from a few generations back, from epigenetic changes in the parents’ genes, and from negative influences on the mother during the intrauterine development period. So epigenetic changes to the embryo and fetus can significantly affect the way the mind functions throughout life.  No one is born with a blank slate for a mind!

APPLYING EVIDENCE TO THE MIX

As we mature, we are offered evidence to direct our lives from parents and friends, teachers and neighbors, politicians, radio and TV commentators, physicians and priests, and even enemies—who may tell us where to go! But, how probable is the evidence? Few still believe that the world is flat. Few believe that vaccinations don’t prevent diseases. Most believe that humans are too numerous, too energy-dependent, and are causing climate change. So what is the most probable evidence that we can use? Do we put all of our chips on FAITH, or do we bet on FACTS? And if facts, which are more valid?

›  If a Nobel Prize winner in economics advises you to take vitamin C, what is her expertise?

›  If, during a pandemic, the major epidemiological communicable disease specialist at the Center for Disease Control advises you to wear a mask to protect yourself and others, how valid might that evidence be?

›  If a mother of an autistic child tells you not to vaccinate your children, what is the quality of her evidence?

›  If all the weather commentators tell you to prepare for a hurricane, but a very popular radio commentator, who dropped out of college after failing all courses his first year, tells you there is nothing to worry about because the hurricane scare is a climate-change inspired hoax—who should you believe? (You’re right! It was  Rush Limbaugh.)

AND SO—

Because of the myriad of influences on our thinking and behavior, we must not only look at philosophy and ethical theory to explain our choices and behavior, we must look at the brain, neuroscience and psychology also. We should know how to evaluate the evidence.

We are not the thinking animal that Aristotle proposed. We are thinking and reacting humans with our biological and psychological makeups complicating our thinking and our traditional belief that we have the free will to choose our values and our life-styles. New knowledge tears us away from the prison of our traditions, then paroles us in a world strongly influenced by genes and unconscious drives and memories. If we are to gain some freedom to direct our lives and guide the progress of our society—we had better understand the hurdles and slopes that can hinder, or aid, our progress.

The limited knowledge that we have, would boggle the minds of our philosophical and psychological ancestors. And, there are so many pieces to the puzzle of the perplexity of our lives and intelligently living them.

David Hume, undoubtedly a member of the elite of Western philosophers, wrote that we cannot deduce ought from is. But we must understand the is before we can determine what we ought.

It’s complicated—that’s why the book is so long!

SECTION I   AN INTRODUCTION TO CHOOSING

I dare say that very few of us, myself included, base all of our behavior on rational well-thought-out choices. But as Miguel Cervantes has Don Quixote warn us—In order to attain the impossible, one must attempt the absurd. Ah yes, dreaming that impossible dream that we can understand why we think, what we think—and why we do, what we do. But we are getting closer—closer than Aristotle, closer than Locke, and closer than Freud.

Some of our behavior is strongly influenced by our genes. Sometimes we are influenced by memories that have long-since sunk into our sub-conscious minds, but are still chemically inscribed in our brains.

Our behavior and the value choices we make are influenced by a combination of genetic propensities, epigenetic imprints, what we have learned and internalized, the realities of our unconscious memories, our basic assumptions and the types of evidence that we choose to believe. We always think that our thinking directs our behavior. Often, however, it trails it. If we behave antisocially, we may explain it by lying or by rationalizing—giving an excuse that is not true, but that we think is true. We recently saw both types of explanations from President Donald Trump, whose narcissism and superiority complex often resulted in statements, policies or actions that were contradictory to verified science. His many comments on the COVID-19 virus and its lack of importance, come to mind. Other things that he said, and did, on the economic front were clearly done with an economic motive clearly voiced. While those on the left clearly disagreed, and had good reasons, his values based in the conservative-reactionary position were clearly in line with his economic value assumptions. So while some of his actions and beliefs were in conflict with science, others were conflicts of values with those on the other side of the political continuum.

You can certainly imagine the intellectual chasm between an atheistic professor of astro-physics or molecular biology and a high school dropout who is an evangelical Christian. You can also readily see the possible conflicts of values between an American racist and a founder of Black Lives Matter. You can appreciate the differences in viewpoints between a 60 year-old millionaire businessman and a poor 18 year-old who cannot afford to attend college even though she has a high IQ and did very well in her high school academics.

Is there only one way to believe, as moral absolutists believe, or are there multiple ways of thinking that may be equally valid, as the moral relativists believe? Clarifying these questions is our endeavor!

In this book we are attempting to have every reader understand why they hold certain values—and decide if they are intelligently held. Then we will present some ideas and evidence that you might consider to widen your choices. We all start our thinking with non-provable basic assumptions. Then we look at as much evidence as possible to see if we are living intelligently. Many people start with a belief, not necessarily a basic assumption, then look only for evidence that backs up their opinion. This is obviously not thinking!

Sometimes we change our basic assumptions. Sometimes we change our opinions. Sometimes we change our values. We should know why!

In the second part of the book we will look at a number of values questions facing society. We look at each question from the point of view of each of the three basic assumptions. What we will find is that, in most cases, depending on the evidence chosen, most questions can have value or not have value. So our life choices and the morality of a society are not as clearly cut as many would have us believe. A few of the issues examined include: abortion, capital punishment, torture, adultery,  euthanasia, and Black Lives Matter.

CHAPTER 2    LOOKING FOR HAPPINESS —A REASON FOR THE  VALUES WE CHOOSE

The one thing we know is that money doesn’t buy happiness. But if you have money you can at least suffer in comfort! But to realize happiness, we must aim beyond and seek more important goals, then we will find that happiness is a by-product of our life’s quest. The noted historian Arnold Toynbee said that ‘It is a paradoxical, but a profoundly true and important principle of life, that the most likely way to reach a goal is to be aiming not at that goal itself but at some more ambitious goal beyond it.’

Dr. Easterlin an economist at USC has been researching happiness related to income for years. Many factors are more important than money! For example, he noted that there’s evidence that happiness is positively related to the frequency of sex. Increasing sex from once a month to once a week sometimes gives the same life satisfaction as earning another $50,000 a year.  Family, vacations, health care availability and many other factors are really important—but you do need some cash!

In America people tend to work instead of vacationing so they have extra money to add a room to their house or to buy a bigger car. In Europe they will nearly always opt for a vacation when they could otherwise work. People in the States still believe that money buys happiness. But when people are surveyed, things like job security, feeling safe, lower crime rates, better medical care and more time with a happy family rate high.  Is this why American is rated 19th on the annual United Nations Happiness Survey, while the Nordic countries are rated in the top four?

VALUES

Some countries are beginning to study what people value—what are their beliefs and what really makes them happy. The research shows that generally children make us less happy. So does losing one’s job. Sex makes us happier, as does enjoying one’s job.

If happiness is to result from what we do, we might start with Buddha’s ideas? Siddartha Gautama, the Buddha, taught that we should desire nothing, then, because if we had nothing, we should be perfectly happy. What do you enjoy?

›  Playing with your young daughter?

›  Being with that special someone.

›  Watching a Grecian or Hawaiian sunset.

›  Seeing Aida in the Roman stadium in Verona.

›  Walking in the woods.

›  Listening to a concert in the Hollywood Bowl.

We all value different things, some motivate us psychologically, through our needs and drives, and some motivate us because of our value choices.

But how do we arrive at our ethical or moral values, like: what do we think about abortion, capital punishment or euthanasia? What about plastic waste covering our beaches, climate change, or overpopulation? What about unwanted children and the lack of a free college education? What about borrowing to pay for our national needs instead of paying for them now?

We are all motivated to action by how strong our psychological or ethical life values push us.  Some decide to be childless. Some join Greenpeace. Some become missionaries. Some become bankers. Different values—different paths.

When discussing values or morals or mores you must understand what I mean. These terms are often interchangeable but not always. ‘Mores’ are the traditions of a society. They may include merely manners and customs but usually they include ethical or moral attitudes. But within groups in the same society these customs may differ somewhat, for example from Catholics to Jews or from businessmen to government workers.

Values are concepts that we hold in high esteem. Do you like classical or rock music, more money or more free time? Or it might be the principles by which we guide our lives. It is this latter meaning that we will discuss.

Morals usually refer to the goodness or badness of an action, our own or that of others. Often the general public thinks it is only about sexual conduct or life and death issues. And while it is often used in a religious sense, such as that God has commanded it, I will use it more in terms of actions that people believe in and act on. So I will narrow the general meaning of ‘values’ and broaden the general meaning of ‘morals’ so that they will be nearly identical. Consequently, when I speak of ‘morals’ or ‘values’ I may be speaking in terms of a person’s beliefs and actions whether they are based on what the person selfishly thinks are good for him, what she thinks that God commands or what he thinks is best for the society in which he wants to live.  So, for example, a Muslim suicide bomber might do it for a self-centered reason—to go to heaven or as revenge for the death of a friend or family member. He might do it because he believes that God wants to kill the infidels. Or he might do it because he wants to live in a religious society governed by the religious laws of Sharia.

It would be nice if each of us thought our way into intelligent behavior, but most of the time we are guided by our psychological propensities or our familial and societal traditions. So we generally don’t think, even though we think that we are thinking. We are generally just reacting.  In order to think critically, like our homo sapiens species is supposed to do, we had better know how, then start to practice it. Otherwise we had better rename our species from ‘thinking humans’ to ‘reacting humans.’ We have to understand how our thinking starts with assumptions, then how we build on those assumptions with evidence of varying levels of verifiability. Some people think quite effectively, but others mistake their feelings for thinking. But we are all are convinced that our perceptions of truth are the most eternal of verities.

What you have learned at home, in your neighborhood or in school is the truth, divine truth. Americans eat with their forks in their right hands, Europeans with the fork in the left. Indians may eat with their right hands, Chinese with chop sticks. No need for tolerance, each is wrong in the other’s eyes. My habits are right, my opinions are absolute truth, regarding: socialism or free enterprise, appropriate dress, how to raise children, or what type of god to believe in. But I’ll defend to the death my right to my beliefs—no matter how unscientific or parochial. Everything I believe in is true.

Ethics is often the word used to indicate what we have been doing lately. It’s not ethical to clone humans because we’ve never done it before. It’s not ethical to license parents to have children because we’ve never done it before. It’s not ethical to recognize homosexual partnerships because we haven’t done it before. Atomic bombs are OK for one nation, not for others. Capital punishment switches from acceptable to unacceptable depending on who is sitting on the high court. Gassing people in prisons is OK in one society, but not in another. Torture, too, is valuable,or not valuable, at different times and in different places. Bribery in one situation is OK, in another it is not. It is legal for lobbyists, but illegal for our competitors in business.

People talk about ethical standards, but they are generally talking about their own ethics. There are few universal ethical or legal standards. Treason against one’s country is one. Murder of a person in your own society is also commonly not allowed. Stealing from someone in your own society also violates a common ethical rule, as does lying.

Murder is unethical, capital punishment is ethical. Rape is unethical, but rape to avenge a social wrong is ethical in some societies. War is unethical, but this war is ethical. Abortion is unethical, denying a women’s freedom to control her own body and her own pregnancy is similarly unethical. Lying is unethical, lying to protect oneself in a life-threatening situation is ethical. What has value for us, or what we hold as moral, varies with time, place and situation. Should it vary? Should every rule be universal—never changing through history? The Ten Commandments are such a universal moral code. What if Hitler were your father, should he have been honored as the commandment requires? Are most Christians dishonoring the code by keeping Sunday rather than Saturday, the Sabbath, as their day of worship? Will all people who say ‘God damn you’ go to hell for taking the Lord’s name in vain? Would it be moral for the police to ‘bear false witness’ against a serial killer who would murder again if released? Which commandment should have the higher priority?

Our values generally are relative to the situation, to the time and place in which we live. And quite frequently they shift from being based on our self-centered interests, to being based on what we think God wants, or often they shift to what we think will produce the best society for us to live in.

We are talking about moral relativism, that our morals depend on what we want. The popes have come down hard on moral relativism, particularly against self-centered values and the hedonism that often propels them. They think that morals should be absolute—and what they believe is God-based. They are generally against gay marriage, divorce, stem cell research and abortion. Their ideas as to what actions are ethical are quite the opposite of Spain’s prime minister who has social policies favoring gay marriage, easier divorce, more stem cell research and legalized abortion. Spain was merely following the rest of Europe in passing laws that favor the individual’s free choice and the advancement of the welfare state. So, thinking people will often disagree on what is moral and what is not.

But perhaps if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.

When we read that a bioethicist or a medical ethics specialist has said that something is unethical they seldom look at all of the ethical possibilities or explain them in their decisions. A medical ethicist at a Catholic hospital will often have a quite different decision on what is ethical for a patient than an ethicist from a Lutheran hospital or from a county medical center. When we cannot agree on truth, such as whether the universe was created by a supernatural designer or it just happened, or whether evolution is or is not a valid and reliable explanation of how the biological world developed—how can we get a universal agreement on how to behave?

We all see the world through our own eyes—our own points of view. Whether based on our religion, the traditions of our society, our independent thinking or our self-centered desires—our thinking is clouded by what we think we know. And you remember what Shakespeare said, There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so.

Our values affect many areas of our lives. For example, in a medical setting we see a mental illness, such as depression that affects people in most populations. In the West drugs and therapy are usually the preferred treatment. In some of the underdeveloped areas, shamans are more likely to be given the task of healing the afflicted. In our modern world we look to science for probabilities, such as which potential cure is more likely to succeed, then we look to our values to see whether or not we should use it. Our values often trump what science indicates. Just look at what happened in America during the COVID-19 pandemic. People wanted their traditional freedom to leave their houses, go to work, and not wear masks. The result was that America led the world by considerable margins in the number of cases and deaths. Their self-centered ideas of freedom cost many thousands of people great suffering and the loss of their lives. Society’s costs rose too, because of increased Medicare and Medicaid spending.

We generally think we are right—and will defend a meaningless position, such as a change in values, because it is traditional. Of course, our tradition was given to us by the Almighty, or by Emily Post.

It reminds me of a Norwegian professor who did some undergraduate work at Stanford University. She was taken into a sorority. All the ladies ate their meals together. She was appalled by the poor manners of the American students. Her mother had taught her good table manners at home, rules like don’t put your knife or fork down once you start eating, and cut one bite at a time