TED Conversations

Zack K
  • Zack K
  • Arvada, CO
  • United States

This conversation is closed.

Create a Universal Code of Ethics

Isn't it about time that the world that the world stop finding reasons to fight and start finding reasons to join together. Why isn't there universal order in our world, especially when we are visiting others. I think that the forms of government and protest going on today suggest parts of a universal right and wrong that we all should and would be willing to follow. Things like Democracy and even Communism have peaces of the true truth that form a single and ultimate form of law.
Pieces of a puzzle that is how we function as a whole.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    Zack K

    • 0
    Mar 16 2012: Zared,
    First off i don't your getting what i mean by happiness (and probably many others), it has nothing to do with material possessions, nor does it have to do with needing more after it is attained. I also think that your confusing greed and materialism, because after all money doesn't mean happiness so nether does having more. I still don't understand what exactly your argument is.

    "happiness infringes on equality because it makes people always want more"?
    No because happiness has nothing to do with the wanting of more.

    "happiness is relative"
    True, but nobodies happiness should be at the expense of another.

    " Distinguish and discriminate are separated by a very thin line"
    No because one is racism and the other is to, like you said, distinguish people like Abraham Lincoln from George W. Bush.

    "Differences in perspectives are likely to cause social traps because each person might be against the other person's perception"
    Social traps as you put it, are inevitable, the solution to those problems is to show that the different perspectives (as long as they are within the basic code of ethics) are not that different. Therefor there is no need to impose anything. And they can be solved by the court of law.
    • Mar 17 2012: Happiness is totally connected to wanting more because happiness is not at a fix point. This is not greediness, it is simple human nature. A utopia is no place because people will always feel gratified only temporary after suppressing his or her expectations, neutral since happiness is not infinite, and deprived after realizing there is always more. This is known as adaption-level phenomenon. True, happiness should not be at the expense of another person, but it happens anyway because the world is not just. Discrimination is not necessarily racism but in-group bias, favoring the in-group over the out-group, which is only accomplish by the act of distinguishing the in-groups from the out-groups. As mentioned before, the world is not just, so the court of law can be bias to one party and suffer from social traps. Your idea is ideal for it holds no objective foundation. In other words, it needs to be realistic instead of optimistic.
      • thumb

        Zack K

        • 0
        Mar 17 2012: i think that you are being pessimistic not realistic. What your saying is that everyone -not just a few- pursue "happiness" at the expense of others (not very realistic). I am saying that as a whole man can overcome corruption and greed. Peoples insecurity with their current status or position is not a point of happiness. And if you believe that you never reach happiness, because you are always chasing it, then that is a sad life.

        Your so called realistic statements are dis proven by the existence of charities, non profits, and many other selfless actions that people do all the time.

        And once again distinguishing is clearly different from racism, and your in groups and out groups are based on your assumption that we need to have in groups and out groups to survive. And also the assumption that all bias will lead to conflict.

        Obviously primitive humans would need to compete for dominance and a primitive survival, but we are a lot different now.
        • Mar 17 2012: Bias is the foundation of conflicts. It is arrogance. I never said happiness comes out of selflessness nor did I say that happiness is impossible to reach. In matter of that statement, I actually said there was no level of happiness to reach for happiness is at a relative level. Charities are out of the desire to fulfill the happiness of others. In return, the desire is fulfilled and the people, who worked at charities, are filled with joy. This joyfulness would not last forever because these persons are not robots. Emotions come and go, but it is not impossible to enjoy these feelings when they come. We need in-groups and out-groups for a variety of reasons such as to have theory of mind, which enables use to distinguish oneself from others; attachment, which enables us to trust others; and identity, which enables us to gain one's sense of self. I never said happiness always come at the expense of other, but I did say that happiness "can" come at the expense of other because the world is not just. Distinguishing is the foundation for discrimination. What I meant was that discrimination is not just racism, it is simply favoring your own group in a delusional matter. We are more of the same, different than primitive humans, but in the end, we are more of the same. I am not being pessimistic, your idea is a utopia, which is impossible to have as a working society. Think realistically about human nature.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.