The following is a review of Stefan Molyneux’s Universally Preferable Behavior – A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics:

The first time I read this book (UPB), I didn’t really “get” it. I mean, I saw the logic and the proof and thought, “Hey, that’s kind of neat.” I was not able to access the implications that the proof of this theory would have in my life and in the greater world.

I have since re-read UPB. While I still struggle with the full range of the implications for my life, I think I get it (certainly more now than I have before).

The null zone concept is brilliant as well as fascinating! I now have the image in my mind of a “null zone” being forcibly inserted between the “little truths” and the “Great Truths”, which disconnect abstraction from practice in the minds of individuals.

This alone ought to be enough to demonstrate to anybody why this is a multi-generational project. Once you’ve had abstractions forcibly disconnected from practice within your mind, it is a trek through the fires of ten thousand hells to reconnect them.

Also of incredible resonance to me is when Molyneux discusses the emergent properties of morality within society as opposed to the imposition of whim-based morality from a centralized authority. This is the fundamental “reversal” of intuition that either Dawkins or Dennett (I can’t remember quite where I read it) has described when it comes to the science of evolution; that life, the universe, and everything do not proceed from the top-down, but from the bottom-up. Complexity and order are emergent properties of matter over time, hence it makes sense that morality and social order are emergent properties of human society over time.

Eradicating that “null zone” within my own mind and becoming ever more aware of my top-down moral standards is the horrible, horrible consequence of UPB. The upside, however, is that if, one day, I have children… I will not inflict a “null zone” upon them and will equip them to be resistant to it!

I haven’t found any flaws. I think that Stefan Molyneux has done it.

The road which takes me from mysticism to rationality passes through many junctures, but the one on my mind this morning is that of evolution.

I couldn’t say when I first heard the term, but I certainly labored under multiple misconceptions as to its claims as well as to its supporting evidence for many years before finally taking it upon myself to look into the matter independently.

What I discovered when I did so was that everything I had been told about evolution in particular had been utterly wrong. What had been shoved down my throat was a combination of deception, manipulation, and conspiracy. What I find most amusing (in a sad way) is the depiction of “scientists” as these evil, horrible bastards who want to “rob us of our way of life!”

What I find especially amusing about that is that while there are some scientists who, for sure, consider religion to be incredibly harmful, there are probably more who, quite frankly, choose to spend their time doing science instead. It’s all up to the individual, of course!

In any case, what I discovered for myself through the theory of evolution is the total reversal of my worldview. Instead of top-down, where there was an all-powerful creator (or, a central source of existence), the world actually grew from the bottom-up.

This isn’t simply a matter of changing perspective. This changes the entire frame of reference. As you might consider the difference between a geocentric and a heliocentric model of the solar system, so evolution is a similar change, but yet more fundamental.

I owe a debt to authors like Richard Dawkins for so colorfully pointing these things out. And yet… the conclusion is unimportant if one does not understand the methodology.

I understood the conclusions, in part, far before I understood (or, rather, began to understand) the methodology behind the conclusions.

It isn’t so important that we know where we came from. It is much more important that we know how to know.

This is where the greater world of philosophy comes in. The methodology is important if you wish to take the conclusion of evolution and see if it applies anywhere else in the world. Certainly, the evidence for it applying to biology is overwhelming–you have to blind yourself in order to not accept it. However, applying evolution to society or language or any other discipline without understanding the methodology is being just as willfully blind as the raging religioso who vehemently denies reality.

I may well have done this myself, especially since I tend to see patterns that may or may not correspond to each other–just like everybody else. For example, I see a direct parallel between the worldview of most religious faiths–a centralized planner directing the universe that demands our obsequience–and the worldview of just about everybody in existence on the planet in government as a centralized planning agency directing every aspect of our lives… that also demands our obsequience.

Those tend to be very abstract, and many people–far from a majority–understand that these abstractions do not deserve our obsequience. These abstractions do not deserve our servility. Adherents demand it and, when they can, they violently attempt to obtain it, but they cannot ever truly get it, not in the sense of voluntary submission out of love of virtue.

There is another group, another abstraction of sorts, that follows this model. They are the centralized planners that purport to orchestrate the goings on in our lives and demand our obsequience in return. They demand our servility, our “respect,” our “love.”

This abstraction is that of the family.

“The family” does not deserve our love any more than God or politicians do.

The only people that deserve our love are those that are good.

Goodness does not derive from fantasy or biological accident.

This is, perhaps, the most fundamental application of evolution–the goodness of the family is not inherent in the biological relationship. It does not proceed from the top-down. Goodness emerges from the bottom-up–from the individual. From the internal. From the person. Goodness comes from within, and is not imposed from without.

I am trying to live my life as a good person, trying to live as one who deserves love… and I am withholding my love from those who do not deserve it, as painful as that is at times, because I have been told otherwise my entire life.

Thanks go to the efforts of Stefan Molyneux and the participants of Freedomain Radio.

Watch: Youtube: Evolution IS a Blind Watchmaker