JA5.3. Basic attributes of totaliztic good deeds and totaliztic sins
#1
@ Dr. Ing. Jan Pająk

JA5.3. Basic attributes of totaliztic good deeds and totaliztic sins

As this was indicated in previous subsections several times, totaliztic good deeds and totaliztic sins are obeying all laws which refer to energy. These laws cause that both these concepts also fulfil several strict rules and equations. In turn such rules and equations give to totaliztic good deeds and sins several very clear properties. One of numerous consequences of the existence of these properties is, that both concepts can be used for formal proving and for logical analysis (a good example of such theoretical proving and analyses, for which these two concepts can be used, is contained in subsection JC11.1 /?/). This means, that the existence of these attributes, and also their knowledge, have a large scientific and formal significance. For these reasons, the attributes of totaliztic good deeds and sins are discussed in this subsection.
Attributes of totaliztic good deeds and sins can be subdivided into two groups: a) categorizing attributes and b) descriptive attributes. Categorising attributes are these ones, which allow to distinguish between good deeds and sins. Therefore, each attribute of this group is clearly fulfilled by a given category (e.g. by sins), but is not fulfilled by the opposite category (e.g. by good deeds). In turn descriptive attributes are these, which explain consequences of good deeds and sins.
Below the most important attributes of totaliztic good deeds and sins are listed. Here they are:
A. Categorising attributes (these allow to categorise easily, means to distinguish between totaliztic good deeds and totaliztic sins):
1Yes. A constructive prevention of a totaliztic sin to take place, represents a totaliztic good deed. (E.g. a good deed is a prevention accomplished by reversing this sin into a totaliztic good deed, or convincing a sinner to reverse his/her sin into a totaliztic good deed, and to abandon the original idea of carrying out this sin.)
2Yes. Every opposite, or reversal, of a totaliztic sin, which instead of running downhill in the moral field, runs uphill in the moral field, becomes a totaliztic good deed. (E.g. if not taking an umbrella when we go for a walk while is going to rain, is a totaliztic sin of a "self- destruction" type, then taking an umbrella when it is going to rain, is a totaliztic good deed of a "self-improvement" type. Also such a good deed is to wait with going for a walk, until rain stops.) Therefore, when we are faced with the intention of committing a totaliztic sin, we should reverse it quickly into any totaliztic good deed, and only then implement it.
3Yes. The acceptance of outcomes of someone's totaliztic good deeds, in itself is also a totaliztic good deed.
1No. Active prevention of someone from doing a totaliztic good deed, represents a totaliztic sin. (Actually, there is an empirical method called a "blind Samurai method" described in subsection W6.1 /?/, which concerns the activities of "evil parasites" described in subsection A3. This method states that "if you are sure that you are doing a totaliztic good deed, and someone intensely tries to stop you from doing it, this means that your totaliztic good deed is extremely important for our civilisation; therefore the more pressure is exerted on you to stop this good deed, the more you should intensify your efforts to actually complete it".)
2No. All opposites or exact reversals of an activity, which represents a totaliztic good deed, are constituting totaliztic sins. (For example, if undertaking a defence from an aggression, is a totaliztic good deed, then either our unprovoked attack on someone would be a totaliztic sin, as well as to refuse to defend ourselves, when someone is attacking us, would be such a sin.) Therefore, when we are faced with the someone's negative pressure, or with some negative situation, which force us to commit a reversal of what we know for sure that it represents a totaliztic good deed, in no case we should subdue to this pressure or situation - and we should complete our original good deed intended, or not to complete any action at all.
3No. A passive acceptance of someone's committing a totaliztic sin, as well as every acceptance of outcomes of such a sin, also represents a totaliztic sin.
B. Descriptive attributes (they describe various consequences of good deeds and sins):
B1. Every human activity, even the most banal one, in given circumstances causes the change of someone's amount of moral energy. For example, this activity may run uphill, or run downhill, in moral field, and thus change the level of potential energy. Similarly every feeling, altitude, motivation, verbal communication, telepathic message, which managed to influence any activity, also causes the change in someone's moral energy. Therefore every human activity (as well as all these feelings, mental states, and communications) occurring in unambiguously specified circumstances, can be qualified to either a category of totaliztic good deeds, or to a category of totaliztic sins.
B2. Depending on circumstances in which it is carried out, the same human activity can be qualified either as a totaliztic good deed or as a totaliztic sin. Therefore for each activity, the process of qualifying to a category of totaliztic good deeds, or totaliztic sins, must be conducted only on basis of the complete understanding of all circumstances that it takes place. Even though, for some especially important activities, because of the possibility of making a human error in judgement (e.g. there are hidden circumstances attached to a given activity, about which we do not know), totalizm recommends to additionally check their moral merit on the basis of other moral laws, especially on the basis of the Boomerang Principle.
B3. Moral laws have hardwired into them systems of automatic rewarding for doing totaliztic good deeds, and punishing for committing totaliztic sins. Therefore each completing of a totaliztic good deed is always automatically rewarded in several different ways. In turn every committing a totaliztic sin is always automatically punished in several different ways.
B4. Every totaliztic good deed, and also every totaliztic sin, has two parties involved, e.g. givers and receivers, or sinners and victims, etc. Furthermore, in the real world the other party always has a free will not to accept a good deed, or a sin, which is served to it, and has a free will to convert it into an opposite (i.e. to convert a good deed into a sin, or to convert a sin into a good deed). Therefore, this other party always introduces to our considerations an unknown quantity, the behaviour of which we are not able to predict. So in order to still be able to carry out our qualifying, in spite of this unknown quantity, the concept of totaliztic good deeds introduces a simplifying assumption "that we live in a perfect world", while the concept of totaliztic sins introduces a simplifying assumption "that we live in a world without a will". These assumptions, and errors of judgement which they potentially introduce, cause that we should limit the application of both concepts only for categorizations of small everyday chores, which do not carry too much of moral energy.
B5. Our access to the aspects of life that are highly sought-for (e.g. happiness, quality, freedom, self-fulfilment, longevity, etc.) must be paid with moral energy that we accumulated in our counter-bodies. Therefore, the more totaliztic good deeds we manage to do in our life, and the more totaliztic sins we avoid to commit, the better our access to these sought-for qualities of life is.
B6. All activities, which in a "perfect world" would either increase moral energy in all people involved, or would prevent the decrease of this energy, are called "totaliztic good deeds". The generation of moral energy still takes place (and is most recommended by totalizm, because it does not create any negative feedbacks) when we do the anonymous totaliztic good deeds, means we do them for people whom we do not know, and even never met.
B7. In doing totaliztic good deeds no hierarchy should be respected (e.g. type: you are my boss, so you should do them first), also no code, or order, should be obeyed (e.g. type: you are less needy, so you should help first). The choice of doing or ignoring these good deeds should be left to the free will and moral judgement of every individual person, and therefore whoever first sees an opportunity to do a totaliztic good deed, and feels as to do it, he/she should seize this opportunity without looking what anyone else is doing.
B8. If a given situation creates a moral dilemma, because it contains components which qualify it to both, a category of totaliztic good deeds, and a category of totaliztic sins, then the person who tries to solve this situation should either atomise it into smaller issues, and then solve each one of these issues separately, or converge it with other entities, and create a bigger entity, which is then solved as a single whole (for details see subsection JA4.5).
B9. All activities, which in a "world without a will", would reduce moral energy in any intellect involved, are called "totaliztic sins". Committing totaliztic sins, in long run always reduces moral energy in the sinner (if not directly, then it reduces it in the result of the Boomerang Principle). The reduction of moral energy still takes place even if we do not know the people which our totaliztic sins are going to affect. Therefore, totalizm forbids to commit totaliztic sins, even if they are committed completely anonymously.
B10. Every intellect, which is allowing that moral energy it generates in the result of doing totaliztic good deeds, is much smaller then the amount of moral energy it looses in the result of totaliztic sins, is going to die in very dramatic circumstances, because it is to fall a victim of a "moral suffocation" at the moment when the level of his/her moral energy reaches zero.
If one is able to effectively apply the above attributes and rules in his/her everyday life, then the majority of brief moral situations that he/she faces, should be possible to solve just by using only them. However, it is again remained that in very important situations we should not rely just on the categorization of a given intention to the group of totaliztic good deeds or totaliztic sins, but we should also verify the merit of this intention by additional analysing it from the point of view of other moral laws, totaliztic mechanics, etc.

=> JA5.4.
Antworten to top



Gehe zu:


Benutzer, die gerade dieses Thema anschauen: 1 Gast/Gäste