All the theory's I work up stem from the “fact” that all men are created equal, or at least there lives are of equal value.
This leads many of my theories to emotional crescendos. However, as I am fond of cutting the basic theory out from under others belief structures, and there is no one else around right now; I'll try to examine the everyone is equal theory.
First it is obvious that not every one is mathematically equal. We vary in a number of important aspects. Height weight speed intelligence attractiveness ect.
Then what we mean when we say that one is equal is that one person ought to be of no more value than another.
But here we come up against reality. We each value ourselves much higher than we value strangers on the other side of the world. When we buy groceries, we claim most for our families and friends and spare little if any for the homeless. And as a plain fact I value my mother more than i value most others on this planet. I think most other people do as well. As a species who remain helpless infants for such a long time, it is difficult to imagine species survival if we didn't place a much higher value on our selves and families than on outsiders.
So then if people are of differing values to each of us, how do we then justify claiming all men are equal? The argument that to each man he is most valuable cant stand up once you factor in suicides and acts of extreme bravery when protecting others. As well; using the general value every one places on each other as that's persons actual value, presupposes that each person is equal in there ability to assign value?
Why would i have to accept the opinion of a person whom i value so little that i will allow them to starve to death? (we allow people to starve in every city as we waste our money on frivolous things like clothing).
In fact as its obvious that once hes dead he is unable to have values, this would tend to justify my killing others in order to have my values and wishes expressed.
This seems to play in to the “might is right” mind set.
Now far be it for me to challenge the equality of man, and stop because might is right sounds overtly aggressive.
Supposing for a second that, a logical morality did boil down to brute force. This doesn't necessarily lead to a master slave relationship. Because as I learned from both the smurfs and gummy-bears, one twig is easily broken, but not a bundle. There is strength in numbers. This would lead us to conclude that we ought to value those who would band together with us and further our causes. accepting that we would also want to further there causes. But this is nothing like equality, for we needn't value all that would support us the same. The stronger (and more powerful, assuming money/power needn't need strength) a member of our group, the more she is to be valued. And the weaker the more dis-valued. Now i admit this sounds closer to the world we do live in than any notion of actual equality. But I'm not ready to admit that the out come of a logical morality is the feudal system that has already crumbled. It is no logical to persist in acts one knows will lead only to failure.
So either we have to either turn back and find another path from might begets right, or back farther and realize its illogical to value people differently. Or develop a parabolic equation on how we value others , one that can't allow for us allowing for others to die.
