My impression is that nothing is in control, which of course is to the dismay of something, anything and everything. Just as what is significant in one’s life (children, spouses, relatives, friends, careers, philosophy…) ought be no less significant to one even were a cosmic nihilism to be established as empirically sound, so to I feel it is what we relate to in our lives which creates the significance of morality, i.e. it is an epiphenomenon of our propensity to care about the fact we’re conscious of what fills our time. There is no litmus test, as there is no litmus. In the event of nature proceedint to repose a “new humanity”, nothing is lost to humanity. We’ve lived it through, whichever way, and that’s enough. Now I don’t mean to speak for the malnourished child in Biafra, but I would also not suppose to prejudge what value that life lives for itself nonetheless. What is of value, perhaps, is that our experiences are sheer creations of our time. We need not be appreciated by the audience of a different dimension to appreciate our own presence. Or so I say at the moment.
That’s what I’m wondering. There is an accumulation – a totality of experiences and the knowledge that complements those experiences – everything about the human element projected on to the world around man. A reflection of what is in his mind. Therein is a strength and inertia that defines purposefulness. It creates us demanding that we use its time to keep things as they are and not disrupt the present state of affairs. And yet it is an artificial dimension in a non existent reality providing a mold for a non existent self. How much a person buys into it determines how much self worth he wears on his sleeve.
Is it unjustified abandonment to break away from the establishment? Or is it with decency and honor one stands alone on his own two solid feet against the forces that tells him what he must be? Which one is not moral?
Might there be a third way, as well, where one flows with the forces whose conceit it is to further form one, and observes how those same forces are conformed by what one floats withinto them… so as to be as subtly “controlling” as is nature itself? Thuswise one need not do anything but be oneself with least effort, while both enjoying the benefits of human accumulation and influencing its course. In any case, I think it’s quite reasonable to suppose that all three ways may well be moral… differentiated simply by the amount of effort one is compelled to put into it. Nelson Mandela, for instance, clearly put both feet down; Jerry Garcia broke away; the ubiquitous multitude of anonymously unsung worked within, making their own little difference. So, though some ways are more dramatic, all, I think, contribute to the creative accumulation. I’m guessing I’ll be unsung, but here I am anyhow: Goin’ to the River. 
Diction, nor contradiction, are reality (though taking place within it)–they are part of appearance, a word which has no meaning if there is no reality to which appearance may or may not correspond.
Contradiction occurrs in appearance–reality does not permit it.
That is why there are no married bachelors.
Sorry–only scanned your dialogue, finished & Oughtist…and this is a drive-by…won’t be back for a while…
That’s why we have invented reality. Otherwise you have no way of experiencing the reality of anything—the reality of that person you are posting to there, for instance, or even your own physical body doing the posting. You have no way of experiencing that at all except through the help of the knowledge that has been put in you. So, there may not be any such thing as reality at all. I do have to accept certain basic things for the purpose of surviving and procreating. As far as the relationship between words and reality: None. There is nothing beyond language.
What is this ‘reality’ that words are being utilized to describe? We can talk about it or think about it only by use of the knowledge behind the words. The assumption of reality is there. Without the knowledge of ‘reality’ there is no way to experience it, obviously.
Knowledge (recognition) and naming are one and the same. Whether I name it or not, the very recognition of ’reality’ itself means that the naming is already there, whether I use the word or not. The word is the thing. If the word is not the thing, what the hell is it? It is all right for the philosophers to sit and discuss everlastingly that the word is not the thing. That implies that there is something there other than the word. So you cannot accept the fact that the word is the object. That is, even if you say that there is an object without using the word, it means that there is a separation there, a division.
Moral Truth Litmus
IS yellow/ontology/true
discovered/grounded in God’s always perfect being (existed essence)
^^What we should be.^^ Character. Virtue.
OUGHT blue/epistemology/good
treats other/them & self/us interchangeably, true for all or none
^^How we should do.^^ Conduct. Deontology.
WHOLE red/aesthetic/beautiful
Live (love) in immovable, abundant joy as loved despite circumstance, good or bad.
^^Why we should be/do.^^ Consequences. Teleology.
In sum: What/why we should be, how/why we should do, is grounded in God’s always existed essence (ultimately demonstrated on the cross), immovably loving the other as self.
In fact, it is improbable that any civilised community could survive without regard for important moral principles such as fairness and justice. Click Here
Funny thing about that. If we couldn’t survive without these principles, then how did we get started without them (or…did we?)? And why are they the things we consider worth dying for?
What Be? Answers what grounds the why/how in reality. True Virtue/Character. Ontology/metaphysics.
orders all being/truth under it
How Do? Answers how to apply/interpret/live the why/be. Good Duty/Conduct. Epistemology/justification.
orders all doings/goods under it
Why End? Answers why we be/do, to the point it is worth living/dying for. Beautiful Teleology/Aesthetic. Whole Purpose/Function.
orders all ends/purposes under it
Same sum as in quote above.
Revaluation/judgment happens up top. Need all three spheres for it to be justified & true.
There’s your movement in alignment with the eternal, Oughtist.
