How to save the world
Dont like the current status of the world? Does all the suffering, misery, and horrors bother you to the very root of your soul, but you feel inadequate to do anything about it? This site is my attempt to answer that very same drive, what can we do to make the world a better place.
Its a question that nags at me constantly and encures emotions ranging from deep depression to ecstatic optimism. What can I do? Am I morally required to do something? How much? What should my state be morally required to do? How much should I give up in my efforts to make the world a better place? All of my time? Some of my time?
Do I bear morally culpability for allowing the world to persist in its state, for not giving my all to change it? Do I have any right to enjoy my freedom when so many others have NO freedom to enjoy?
Buddhism teaches that all suffering has causes, and if they have causes they have cures. I will approach the question of how to save the world as best as I can, since it is a primary motivator for me, and I will presume, as a Buddhist would, the if the problems of the world have causes, then they have cures.
How To Save The World ...in three steps
1st - Objectively define the problems of the world and determine its current
status.
2nd - Objectively Identify the causes of these problems.
3rd - Objectively Identify the course of action required to resolve these problems
How To Save The World ....STEP 1
1st - Objectively define the problems of the world and determine its current
status.
Declare ethical principles with which to judge the world
If we are going to judge the world, we need some rules to judge it by. Some may prefer religious doctrines or philosophers directives. I will start with the most basic premise; freedom. The state of the world follows as a result of our comparisons of freedoms. I will assert that freedom is morally prefferable in all cases over non-freedom, and base my judging of the state of the world on that premise. There are many kinds of freedoms, which I will seperate into two basic catagories, moral-freedoms and non-moral freedoms.
I choose these catagories based on the theological argument of evil, which is most frequently invoked when justifying a belief or non belief in god. The argument of evil dictates that if a god is benign and all powerfull, would it not prefer a state of good over a state of evil? Subsequently, since there is so much evil, how could there be a god? Obvious objections are given by the theologin, but the most important one of consideration is seperating of moral evil from non-moral evil. That is, evils that are the result of a moral action, such as murder and rape, and evils that are a result of non-moral actions, that is, actions not dependant on someones choice. These include diseases, accidents, and aging. The most common theological justifcation for the existence of evil is that God allows free choice, which justifies the existence of moral evil. But to justify the existence of non-moral evil, theologins will retort that whatever suffering one endures in this life is easily outweighed by an eternity of bliss in the afterlife. Of course, non-believers would assert, that makes the universe of a God and a universe without a God completely indistinguishable from one another.
Whatever side you fall on, the catagorization of events based on choice vs. non-choice is very important. Many people suffer from others choices (such as the 300,000 people murdered under Saddam Hussien's Iraq, or the millions that die from the UN banning of DDT used to combat Malaria) but many people also suffer from things that are not the result of someones choice, mainly disease, accidents, and malnutrition (although malnutritin, disease, and others are sometimes grey areas, as they are can be the result of the choices of oppressive dictators or ignorant people of persuasion with good intentions)
Something that is moral has a very concise defination, the moral is the result of the chosen. What can not be chosen can not be judged as moral or immoral. Being born was not moral, nor immoral, as it was not a result of your choice. With that in mind, I will start by seperating the problems of the world into these catagoris.
existence death (natural) thought accidents choice disease action aging property Defining Freedoms
In many cases these definations will overlap, but it most cases the concept will be clear, and will make judging the state of the world more attainable. Each freedom is dependant on the one preceeding it. Many of the moral freedom precepts are in fact dependant on non-moral foundations. For example, the moral freedom of choice is dependant on the non-moral foundation that, at least right now, we all must eat to continue to exist. You can not simaltaneously choose to stop eating but continue to exist, in this sense, many freedoms are limited by the laws of nature, these are not restriction on freedoms that I will deal with trying to overcome, as often they are by defination not able to be overcome, although some groups consider them to be as morrally abhorant as oppresive dictators.
Moral Freedoms
Freedom of existence - I consider this the most basic and fundamental freedom, all human beings should be free to exist and no one has the right to take that freedom away from you. If you choose to exist, no one elses choices should stand in the way, and preferable, even non-moral. Only living entities can choose to exist or not, matter has no choice to exist, but we do. Unfortunately, this is a freedom that is all too easy to take away.
Freedom of Thought - No one should police or judge you for thoughts alone. The freedom of thought is second only to existence, freedom of thought is what makes one an individual and a person. Luckily, its difficult to police thought, much to the chagrin of oppressive rulers, who try.
(witness the insistence by the Pol Pot communist regime to make everyone look and act exactly the same, and to punish, often by death, displays of personal emotion or attatchement, they were punished for feeling. Mao's China required all citizens also to look and act the same. )
Freedom of Choice / Action- Closely related to freedom of though, is freedom of choice. While you may be able to think what you want, you might not be able to choose what you want.
Freedom of property - This is a freedom that is closely tied to all preceeding freedoms. Some extreme socialist or anarcho-socialists may vehemently disagree, but having the freedom of choice and action must allow people to act on those freedoms in the material world.
Non-moral Freedom
Freedom from Death - Currently, everyone is condemned to death. Even if you choose to live forever, you will not be able to. There are many things one can do to extend their lives and delay death, but eventually they will die. New technologies on the horizon offer, possibly, the chance to live as long as we want in the future.
Freedom from Disease -
Freedom from Injury -
Freedom from aging -
Ranking the freedoms.
This ranking may come out different for each person, but the result would only be to alter the priority one places on which problems to solve. Ranking these freedoms, however, also requires catagorization. I value my own freedom of thought more than I value a stranger's, but I may not value my own freedom of burning flags over somone elses freedom from being arbitrary executed by a corrupt and oppressive govt. Similiarly, there are many freedoms that I may value my loved ones having over someone I dont know. For these reasons, the catagories will be Self, Loved Ones, and People As in all people.
Moral Freedoms
Freedoms, Self (ranked in order of importance)
Freedom of existence
Freeom of thought
Freedom of choice / action
Freedom of property
To rank your valuation of freedoms, simply ask yourself 'Would I prefer to have freedom of thought and no freedom of property, or freedom of property and no freedom of thought?' If you prefer the former, then you rank freedom of thought above freedom of property.Freedoms, Loved ones
Freedom of existence
Freeom of thought
Freedom of choice / action
Freedom of propertyThis is merely for you to understand how to prioritize your values. That you value your loved ones freedom of thought over property does not mean that you would expect your loved ones to have ideantical prioritization of their values.
Freedoms, People
Freedom of existence
Freeom of thought
Freedom of choice / action
Freedom of propertyAgain, this is merely to identify your valuations. It is impossible to tell what 'people' value more, freedom of thought or freedom of property, and it would be immoral to try to catagorize this valuation as a group anyway, since it would ignore the values of an individual.
Freedoms, compiled
This list of freedoms is the key one. When comparing your values, and what value you place on the freedoms others enjoy, you end up with the prioritization of your concerns.
1) Freedom of existence, self
(my most primary concern is my right to exist, it transcends every other individuals right to exist as a guide to my actions)
2) Freedom of existence, loved ones
(I value my loved ones freedom of existence more than my own freedom of thought. If someone were to make me choose between my freedom of thought and the lives of my loved ones, I would clearly choose the latter)
3) Freedom of thought
Freedom of existence, Self
Freeom of thought, Self
Freedom of choice / action, Self
Freedom of property, Self
Freedom of existence, Loved ones
Freeom of thought, Loved ones
Freedom of choice / action, Loved ones
Freedom of property, Loved ones
Freedom of existence, People
Freeom of thought, People
Freedom of choice / action, People
Freedom of property, People
Examine status of world based on those principles
Problems:
DEATH
SICKNESS
POVERTY
LOW STANDARD OF LIVING
NON-FREEDOMCurrent Status:
DEATH - Lots of it, everyone who is born will Die. Many die prematurely through intentional acts or accidents. Status: We stave of death longer than ever before, and can only hope to accelerate this trend, living longer and healther lives globally.
SICKNESS - The number of deaths from diseases as a portion of the population is in general decline, but the absolute number is higher than ever. Regressions have occured, where in the late 1960's the numbers of deaths from Malaria were in the single digits per year, today they number in the millions per year, due to the international ban on DDT.
POVERTY - The percentage of the population living at substinence or below levels is in decline, but the absolute number is rising. Currently approximately 24% of the world lives on less than 1 US dollar per day, while the least fed of the world today consume 30% more calories than they did in 1950. Status, getting better, but slowly.
LOW STANDARD OF LIVING - Currently the global median standard of living is higher than it has ever been before. With the increase in standard of living, every thing else declines, crime, violence, murder rates, starvation, death, pollution, sickness, oppression. Status: Getting better, but slowly.
NON-FREEDOM - Currently half of the worlds population lives on Democratic nations, the rest remain in despotic, tryannical, or theocratic regimes. The number of countries moving toward democracy is growing, on no two democratic nations have ever been at war with one another, and no democratic nation has ever started a war. Status: Getting better, but slowly.
In general, most of the worlds problems are in decline and that general well being of the humans on this planet is getting continually better, and has never been better than today. Most of the problems, however, are getting better at very slow paces, intolerable by mine and probably many others preferences. We must speed them up.
The Current state of the worlds problems, non-anthropocentric considerations
Nature - The Natural state of the world, from a human perspective, is generally getting better with rising standards of living. However, countries see a decline in environmental quality as they industrialize, only to see rapid increases in quality once people can afford to concern themselves with things other than starving to death.
Beyond human considerations, in a purely abstract not related to living organisms perspective, its hard to judge the state of the world. What are we to judge it against? Without living organisms, it would be a lifeless rock. With that in mind, we can only really judge the state of the world from the perspective of animate objects, life.
Living Organisms - In general, the current state of the world from the perspective of living organisms as a whole remains unchanged through time. Once life emerged, all life become parasitic and competitive, and consumed as many resources and areas as possible until it was either wiped out or evolved. Once one ecosystem is altered, a shift in organism dominance takes place. Its impossible to judge how these dominances *should* be as a moral value and thusly it is difficult to determine the 'state' of the world from the perspective of living organisms as a whole. From a human perspective, the world is getting better, from an intelligent animal perspective, it is also getting better, from a factory farmed animal, it is getting worse, for non-sentient animal life the general trend is worsening, but the rate of the worsening is slowing as more countries move to post industrialization. Status: The smarter the animal, the better it is getting.
The only organism in the world that does not replicate indefinately until it consumes all natural resources is humans (despite Mr. Smiths insistence otherwise in The Matrix) All post industrialize societies see a near or below zero population growth. Once the world achieves similiar status, the population will level off, and might even decline. This is because things concern us other than merely having children, unlike all other living non-sentient organisms.
2nd - Objectively Identify the causes of these problems.
DEATH
Causes - Aging, Disease, Murder, Starvation
SICKNESS
Causes - Sanitary Conditions, Corrupt Governments, anti-scientific thinking, ignorance, costPOVERTY
Causes - Corrupt Governments, anti-scientific thinking, anti-logical thinking, ignorance, costNON-FREEDOM
Causes - Corrupt Governments
3rd - Objectively Identify the course of action required to resolve these problems
DEATH
Cure - Aging, Diseases. Raise the standard of living of the world, change corrupt governmentsSICKNESS
Cure - Improve Sanitary conditions globally, raise the standard of living of the world, change corrupt governmentsPOVERTY
Cure - raise the global standard of living, change corrupt governments, end subsidies in the developed west, ensure development of rule of law, market based economies.
NON-FREEDOM
Cure - increase the spread of information, change corrupt governments.
1st - Objectively define the problems of the world and determine its current status.
To define the problems of the world we must first determine what is and what isnt a problem, and do to that we must define our ethical principles. For example, is inequality a 'problem'? Should all people's status be equal, how should they be kept equal, by force? Is some inequality acceptable, while too much unacceptable?
Define ethical foundations, declaration of principles with which to view the world on.
Ethical principles
1 - the right to own property
2 - the right to trade
3 - the right to remain free from coercion
4 - the right to free speech (self ownership)
5 - the right to justice
Ethical principles values prioritized (ask yourself which you would prefer if you had to choose to prioritize)
Entity:
self
loved ones
friends / family
all people
Values:
life
health
basic necessities (food, shelter, heat)
rule of law (right to property, right to trade, justice)
self ownership (free voice, free from coercion)
Prioritized Values and Entities
life self
life loved ones
good health self
good health loved ones
basic necessities self (food, shelter, heat)
basic necessities loved ones (food, shelter, heat)
life friends
health of friends
life all people
health all people
basic necessities friends
basic necessities all people
Course of action
define the problems of the world
identify the objective resolutions to problems
define a course of action to achieve these resolutions.
Problems of the world (prioritized)
Inverse negation from prioritized values represent prioritized problems of the world
life - death (natural and unnatural)
health - sickness
basic necessities (food, shelter, heat) - starvation, below substinence poverty
Rule of law (right to property, free trade, justice) - communism, despotism, non equally applicable laws
self ownership (free voice, free acting) - no free speech, oppression through coercion
Buddhism, all suffering has causes and cures, identify cures and achieve them
Problems of the world then are the negation of the values
DEATH
life, negation = death. Causes of death, natural and unnatural. (moral and non-moral) Natural, aging, sickness, accidents. Unnatural, murder, starvation, state interference.
TOP KILLER = Aging and age related deteriorition
2nd = Malaria
3rd = Digestive disorders
4th = cancer
5th = heart and circulatory diseases
6th = oppresive governments
7th =
SICKNESS
health, negation = sickness. Threat and effort to stop sickness proportional to its affect. Aging and Age related diseases = TOP KILLER. Malaria - 2nd Killer, 1 - 2 million every year. Easily preventable through pesticide applications banned since 1970. Digestive disorders, 1 - 2 million every year, mostly poverty level children in developing nations.
Top killing diseases
1st - Aging
2nd - Malaria
3rd - Digestive
4th - Cancer
5th - Heart DiseaseRelated SARS Hysteria! Why the SARS Threat was way overblown, compeltely absurd, and the reaction to SARS was more harmfull than the disease itself.
POVERTY (below sustinence level)
basic necessities, negation = no basic necessities. not enough food, shelter. description - living on less than 1 us dollar per day
cause - political and economic systems have blocked many people of the world from raising their standard of living
continuation - political and economic systems continue to block much of the world from raising their standard of living
resolutions
a) make foodstuffs and basic necessities as cheap as possible, and work to continue to depress their costs.
b) prioritize the rule of law in developing countries and the protection of individual property. Ease access to starting and operating business, support the development of market based economies. Note - prioritized over democracy and political voices, market based economies and rule of law are far better indicators of the well being of individuals (e.g. Tawain, China, Vietnam) than good political voice with repressive market systems (e.g. India)myths
people starve because not enough food exists to feed them - lack of food -
STATUS: FALSE - There is more food now than there has ever been in the world as a total and as a per capita average. Mean and median calories avialable continues to increase.
related course of action - Continue to depress the price of food, as food prices decrease, it becomes increasingly difficult for corrupt oppresive systems to keep it out of the hands of the people who need it.
Accelerating the depression of food costs - investigate alternative growth, harvesting, and distribution systems. Hermetically sealed Hydroponic systems can possibly feed 1,000 people per acre. Hydroponics much less dependant on natural land conditions and temperaturs.
Automotated harvesting systems in Hydroponic plants could rapidly collect ripe food, package, and prepare it for distribution
Biotechnology can extend the shelf life, calorie content, and nutritional value of all foodstuffs, further depressing food costs.
Post Industrialized west nations reluctant to not subsidize agrictulture while pioneering free trade, agriculture and textiles is the primary areas where developing countries can compete with the mechanized post industrialized west. Rich western countries must end agricultural and textile subsidies.
CORRUPT MURDEROUS GOVERNMENTS
By far one of the greatest killers in history has been Government. Hisotrically, the more centrallized and despotic a government, the more murderous it becomes. Governments kill through outright directives, genocides, democides, death and labor camps, through depraved indifference, outright malice or pure ignorance. By far the most murderous governments have been Communist, but right wing extreme governments have killed as well.
Historical Mass Murders
Stalin - 65 million murders - Stalinistic Communism has enslaved and murdered countless 100's of millions of people.
Mao - 35 million murders - Chairman Mao is estimated to have caused 35 million or more deaths in his various communist reforms enacted on the population of China.
Hitler - 6 million -
Pol Pot - 3 million murders - Pol Pot led to the deaths of 1/3 rd of the Cambodian Population.
Current murderous and oppresive Governments (See related The Worse Governments in the World)
North Korea
Vietnam
Burma
Cambodia
Laos
China
Cuba
Iraq
Iran
Saudi Arabia
What can be done about these governments?
2nd - Objectively Identify the causes of these problems.
3rd - Objectively Identify the course of action required to resolve these problems