Section Epsilon  Lesson One: Implications For Morality  Introduction The implications of spiritual reconnection have profound impact upon how humans think of morality. Morality is that which seeks to distinguish the right from the wrong and the good from the bad, so that right and good actions can be chosen, and wrong and bad actions can be avoided. Morality is a virtue that operates as an inner behavioral guide.  We sometimes refer to this as our conscience, but it is more than that because, if I understand these lessons correctly, "conscience" is that which is developed by what we are taught from an outside source, while spiritual guidance is an innate part of us because of our spiritual nature as beings and is uniformly the same, as spirit is the same as it relates to human beings. While "spirit" is a constant – conscience is a variable and dependent upon societal guidelines.  Although morality should spring from within, human groupings have devised rules, codes and laws which set forth externally controlled morality. Privileges, perquisites and promises of spiritual reward are offered to those who follow the moral path. Likewise, punishments are doled out for breaches of conduct ranging from the painful disconnection of shunning to the vengeful act of capital murder. But this human form of carrot and stick, bribe and threat morality has only been necessary since humans have not yet understood how to connect with their inner natural morality. Indeed, humans are born equipped with an innate morality predicated upon a unison between the purposes of body, mind, and spirit. The voice of spirit endows humans with an innate morality, complete with safeguards, which is far superior to any human attempt at defining external behavioral controls or guidance.  Morality should spring from "within" because it is spirit driven, as previously indicated. When externally driven, it carries a great deal of unnecessary baggage with it and usually fails in the effort to lift human beings to a higher spiritual potential. Because "controls" are essential to institutions and also justify their existence, encouraging people to self-govern themselves would only lead to a dissolution of these institutions and is, thus, considered threatening to them.  The external moral and legal rules conflict with one another in the modern interconnected world, and can wreak havoc upon the emergence of the necessary global consensus. But worse yet, behavioral dictates which ignore, deny, or judge any aspect of human nature, will interfere with the biological legislation of human nature. Moral codes which are based upon inaccurate declarations about humanity, masquerading as cultural "truth", only further erode the connection between body, mind, and spirit.  Just as the puritan influence formulated a great deal of legislation over the history of our own country, so other countries have been influenced by predominant religious philosophies, causing more moral confusion than guidance, especially in a country made up of people of such varying cultural backgrounds as ours.  In doing so, they continue to pit humans' minds against their own bodies and short circuit the emotional communication between them, ensuring that the bodily safeguards will rule human action. Until humans achieve understanding of the inner guidance, they are doomed to a never-ending cycle of inappropriate self-preservationary actions that keep them at a moral level far beneath their potential. Unenlightened behavioral codes set in motion a cycle which guarantees purposeless, amoral actions in the truest sense of the word. Where moral guidance is not consistent, "amoral" action is consequential. Also, moral teachings which are at odds (i.e. drinking alcohol in moderation is alright vs. drinking any alcohol at all is a sin), tend to create confusion and social conflict where none need exist.  Morality is ultimately about judgment, and as we now know, only the spirit with its knowledge of divine intention can accurately judge. It is simply a matter of restoring the self-understandings which reunite body, mind, and spirit and align the purposes in each action. Phase one of this restoration will be the removal of any inaccurate, judgmental beliefs about human nature. One particularly damaging assumption about humanity deserves first mention in the moral discussion.  There are always those who suffer from a false sense of moral superiority and "they" are the most prone to harshly judge their fellow human beings.  Biological Hedonism  The English word hedonism has become tarnished by dogmatic assertions of religion. So much so, that its original enlightened offering is now lost. But those that coined the term, had captured a universal truth. That which feels pleasant is intrinsically good. These original ethical philosophers had embraced the idea that the Creator knew best how to orient human beings, and endowed the human creation with pleasure and pain as guidance. They had an intuitive awareness of an intentional, biological, divine predestiny despite the heavy misconceptions of external morality offered in their day.  Even though the admonition, "If it feels good, do it!", seems to smack of a form of social decadence, it reminds us that we need not feel guilty simply because what we're doing makes us happy. To do so would be to throw us back into the "Puritanism" mentality that made even laughing a near sin.  They understood that emotion was somehow meaningful. Unfortunately, they did not yet understand the divisions between body, mind, and spirit, nor the potential conflicting purposes, enough to explain the self-preservationary impulse. Pleasure and pain seemed instead to only motivate selfish, competitive, basal pursuits which did not bode well with the social order. Thus, their work was largely rejected for the less-challenging concept of sin. It was easier to explain pleasure and pain within a universe of good and bad forces, evidencing a flawed nature wherein humans succumb to the temptations of evil. But as should be clear, human actions follow pleasure and avoid pain---without exception. Until this is accepted, evolution will be stymied.  Imagine the constraints on evolving if this natural form of guidance did not exist. The very term "human" would represent a creature that conducts himself/herself solely on the basis of defined, dogmatic restraints. Impulse to stray from the established code would be consistently punished and creativity would cease to be allowed. Societies that have come close to adopting this rigidity have nearly destroyed the world.  The word hedonism should take on its rightful and just divinity. For it is the mechanism which provides an unerring guide toward purposeful self-discovery, yet without interfering with complete freedom of will. It is only in freely bringing the mind to this understanding that the guidance can emerge. Mindfully observing the meaningful patterns, the hardwired reaction of body, coupled with the mental analytical abilities, and the spiritual need for meaning, will lead eventually to the messages within these Lessons. (For each of the Creator's systems comes complete with its own evolutionary wisdom and balancing thrust, either leading to its purpose, or a cleansing to start over).  In other words, the road to recovering our spiritual nature leads either toward that goal, or if detoured, loops back to try again and again until time, as we know it, ceases to exist.  The basic impulses toward the good and away from the bad provide the most supreme guidance, regardless of what laws or Holy books might declare. Hedonism merely follows the six basic human needs, calling humans to approach that which feels good and to avoid that which feels bad. These forces will lead to the discovery of the higher purposes, and to the recognition that all amorality springs from action strategies that do not meet all three purposes.  In the final analysis, we can not be permanently deterred from evolving physically, mentally, and spiritually regardless of how many institutions we may create to stifle this natural impulse.  Psychological---indeed biological---hedonism is the essential, first foundational principle upon which any social grouping must be built. In fact, it was one of the primary reasons for the unit of the United States, which now exists as a microcosm for the global community. This particular community arose with the express goal of avoiding the historical limitations of forms of government that prevented the necessary freedom and empowerment of its people. Therefore, the official legal documents set forth the intention for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This has been the unrecognized basis for most of this country's successes, although much progress is still needed.  One can hardly argue with the basic principles upon which one's own society is founded without confounding one's very patriotism. It's hard to argue with success.  Multiple Meanings of Emotional Signals  The validity and divinity of hedonism has remained elusive because the role of emotion has not been discovered. Since the signals themselves have been falling upon deaf ears, their complex messages have not been able to provide their purposeful guidance. The message is only complex to the degree that it addresses all three purposes. It is not difficult to understand them, unless it is unclear that they have specific meanings for body, for mind, and for spirit---all of which must be considered to guide any action choice. The reception of emotional messages does require a certain cultivation of mind, a willingness to consider the possibility of such a system being in place. Before one gets to that point, one has to accept that he/she is a spiritual being, first and foremost and that this physical existence is an intended experience with a purpose.  We know now that the emotional signals mean to body: "Act in ways that will self-preserve." We know that the emotional signals tell the mind: "Act in ways that will self-develop." And that they urge from spirit: "Act in ways that self-express within the world." Although this is fairly straightforward, there are so many limiting ideas set forth about emotion, human nature, and the need for external controls, that it is no surprise that this fabulous gift from the Creator has gone unnoticed.  To preserve self, to develop self and to express self have to represent the essence of our nature and purpose. To quiet ourselves sufficiently to listen is the challenge of our age. While we may act in an instinctive way to preserve ourselves physically, we tend to use our mental messages to simply enhance our self-preservation and our spirit guidance is too often diverted to the same end.  There now exist so many conflicting behavioral directives about how to go about the pursuit of happiness, that the United States is crippled within its own confusion. Hedonism, is but one of many whirling, swirling, conflicting, judgment calls within mass consciousness--- cultural "truths" about human nature. They are more accurately described as spiritual falsities that perpetuate this self-limiting cycle of infighting and self-preservation. The result is another emotion laden concept. For this cycle creates the illusion of "evil."  While "New Age" types and "Fundamentalists" are busy looking down their self-satisfied noses at each other, major religions and philosophies are preoccupied in exaggerating their differences and scaring their members into believing that some other belief system is really a "threat" to all that they hold dear.  The Concept of Evil  Evil springs from the valid idea of purposeless or backward living---even the word live spelled backward becomes evil. Evil is simply the outcome of when something prevents the natural morality from leading humans upon their intended life course. Evil is anti-progressive, and anti-purposeful living, nothing more, and nothing less. There is no evil force that doles out rewarding good feelings for bad actions. Good feelings always serve some intended purpose. But they can motivate violations upon self and others unless all levels of purpose are considered simultaneously. There is no room for the concept of evil when the body, mind, and spirit work together in each action. It becomes as obsolete as the stone knife, for it is but a temporary bridge to the higher understanding of natural morality.  Evil not only has no purpose in our lives, it has no power other than that which we give it by adopting belief systems that institutions use to manipulate us. When we are in touch with our true spirit, there need be no fear that we will err, so long as we devote ourselves to preserving, developing and expressing ourselves.  The concept of sin is its counterpart, which captures any behavior that violates the purposes of self or others. Sin, of course, is nothing more than a self-preservationary action outside of the higher purposes. Many humans think themselves to be sinful, weak, flawed creations, who must throw themselves on the mercy of some higher power simply for being what they are. Any hope of learning or purposeful self-development then falls to rigid forms of external control which further confuse and short-circuit the feeling system, leaving such humans virtually disempowered. The concept of sin itself is far more evil than any action labeled as such.  It is when we stray from purposeful living that we are tempted to think of ourselves as lesser beings. Those who capitalized upon this self-deprecation are simply using that state of mind to control us further. When we elect to weaken ourselves internally, we make ourselves vulnerable to outside control.  Excitement And Morality  Sin has been attributed to many of the most basic of human processes which operate upon the principle of pleasure and pain. Thus, hedonism has taken the rap for the inevitable pitfalls which spring from misunderstanding the emotional system. The emotional system is indeed the intended guide to natural morality, but its arousal and action components have drawn human suspicion since time untold. For it is often the excitement of body that dictates behavior when the mind is not purposefully engaged, throwing fear into the hearts of those who seek to control human action.  Spontaneous expression is considered almost more threatening than an uncontrolled nuclear reaction. Institutional control will not fade until there is greater trust and faith in the innate goodness of human beings both in others and in ourselves. Then, pure joy will truly be appreciated for its "pureness".  Humans love the thrill of excitement. This is the energized, alive feeling that accompanies emotional arousal. Whether it is great love, great anger, great joy, or great fear, the body revs up for action. The heart races, the hormones flow, the endorphins surge, and the muscles receive energy to act. The experience itself can be quite intoxicating and rewarding. This is why there have arisen so many activities for thrill seekers, and just as many aspersions cast upon excitement itself.  When misused in the hands of political or religious institutions, whole populations can be aroused to feel hate toward other populations and/or their respective leaders. From this can follow military action and the setting up of an eye-for-an-eye saga that can go on for generations.  Throughout the world, the universality of human excitement can be seen, from artistic and literary offerings for vicarious passion and excitement, to daredevil exhibitions and roller-coaster theme parks. There are entire industries based upon thrilling competitions, from the early arenas of the gladiators to the modern sports stadiums brimming with emotional spectators. With the technology of today, television and computers bring all types of vicarious interactions right into the home.  The passion for one's team can be so pronounced that households can become divided and genuine feelings of anger can be misdirected with little justification. In a larger sense, people have been known to die over the outcome of a "sporting" event.  Excitement itself has become associated with the confusion about feelings. This is because of the inaccurate interpretations of feeling and the inevitable self-preservationary reactions that follow. Accurate understanding of feelings is the only way out of this dilemma. Indictment of the arousal system or excitement in general is foolhardy. There shall be no moral judgments cast upon any such activity, so long as it does not violate another, just the required awareness of what is actually occurring.  There is nothing wrong with having one's emotions aroused so long as "arousal" does not lead to the passions that, when carried to the extreme, result in physical or emotional harm to another. A greater inner awareness leads to an equally greater understanding of ourselves and the world around us.  In addition to the problem of interpretation, creating vicarious excitement also amounts to manipulation of the emotional system. For it creates an emotional response outside of the purposeful interactions in which they are intended to have the most meaning. But this is not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, any such activities can offer emotional refuge from a world not yet ready for enlightened ones. These activities often allow for the vicarious venting of emotional energy and the necessary and welcome, but temporary, escape from overly stressful environments and situations. They can make the difference between faithful perseverance and giving in to fear and defeat.  In a world where the very act of making a living can put one in an environment where being made to feel inferior is regarded as a proper way for some to succeed, the frustration of not being able to counteract this treatment must find a safe outlet and "vicarious venting" serves that purpose. Until truly enlightened management techniques dominate the workplace, stress-relieving activities of the above nature will remain.  The key to keeping exciting events within the realm of moral behavior is to ensure they are mindfully chosen within the context of all three purposes. This means that they do not take the place of actual connections and external expressions or violate the needs of others. This will also ensure that they are kept within a supplementary area, in designated times of relaxation and leisure within the daily routines, and never to become time-bandits which rob precious moments of physical existence from the purposeful destiny path---or worst of all, become compulsive or additive mechanisms of escapes from the spiritual challenges. Like any other physical pleasure, excitement can become an escape response in order to avoid emotional pain, or a pale substitute for truly rewarding purposeful activities.  One of the more common sources of humor is the frustration of one gender with the sports-preoccupation of the other, but beyond this humor is a level of resentment cultivated by the practice of ignoring opportunities to communicate and share in life's other opportunities. It is helpful to make a conscious distinction between temporary and divine pleasure. All pleasure is good, but the temporary excitement of short term pleasures which might potentially have long term pains, should be kept in their proper perspective. They serve best as temporary bridges to more long-term purposeful paths, and should be respected for their allure as well as their potential to thwart higher more divine pleasures. These are often the "guilt pleasures" we choose knowingly which do not hurt others, but might not be the best long-term choices for ourselves.  The suggestion here would seem to point to a social activity of immediate gratification without a more permanent emotional commitment, a practice described colloquially as the "one night stand".  All concepts of morality should shift to accommodate the inevitability of the manipulation of the emotional arousal, and relax any judgments against it. Humans should feel no pangs of self-reproach when indulging within most any activity, as long as violations of self and others do no occur. All concepts of morality should then instead facilitate accurate understandings, interpretations and responses to the three messages contained within each feeling.  In other words, does the activity preserve one's physical integrity, develop one's mind and encourage the expression of spirit. An activity that does not compliment these three areas, should be reexamined.  Guilt and The Human Conscience  Pangs of self-reproach bring us to the next aspect of morality---human conscience. Acting purposefully, is acting morally, is acting within conscience. To act within one's conscience is nothing more than to listen to the voice of spirit and to act upon it within all three purposes.  In other words, to act to 1) preserve one's body 2) develop one's mind and 3) express one's spirit should be in line with the dictates of one's conscience. Pure conscience, when not obstructed by the culturally implanted slivers, is our most reliable compass. Part of the role of these Lessons is to help us in that "re-purification".  Breakdowns only occur when the feeling signals are misunderstood, leaving confusion and conflicting impulses between body, mind, and spirit. Any action which ignores or denies any one of the divine purposes is truly amoral. Self-preservationary reactions based upon fear and anger are amoral for they place body above mind. They choose to fight to change the world to match an undeveloped, distorted, or unbending mindscape, instead of allowing the mind its moral, purposeful, and necessary self-development. The result is a "loner" strategy that frustrates spiritual expression. It is fairly easy to see how fear and anger can lead to violations upon self and others. But the more insidious and potentially hurtful emotion of moral concern is the feeling known as guilt ."  We bear witness, almost on a weekly basis, of people whose anger has resulted in injury and death to one or more other people. Would that those who do such could have been exposed to the principles spelled out in these Lessons.  Although guilt is commonly thought to be the emotion most linked with conscience, this is simply not so. Most events which elicit guilt are in fact amoral, but for entirely different reasons than might be suspected. They spring from amoral mental shifts which incorporate ideas into the mind which place mind above the body. This is when a learning experience, a right response is chosen, but one which lets in a sliver.  Guilt is too often a part of the mind that can be used to manipulate others, but only for a temporary period until the user has succeeded in getting what one wants. The "mother/daughter relationship" is a good example and should be examined further in light of the above.  Instead, guilt has become a much misunderstood and overworked emotion. Guilt has become a favored and powerful tool of manipulation by mass consciousness, particularly in the realm of religion. Once humans instill the idea of sin and evil, "the devil" gets in the door. Then they attach many natural drives and bodily functions to the concept of evil, pitting mind against body, setting the stage for the bodily safeguards to dictate seemingly evil behavior. This is self-fulfilling prophecy at its worst. The irony is that humans have the audacity to second-guess the Creator, and in His name, create and manipulate guilt feelings within their adherents. And then to reinforce the slivers by utilizing the very guilt signals they produce, as a constant reminder of the weakness and "amorality" of the person.  The too frequently used threat that "God will punish you for...whatever", is mass control at it's worst, reflecting moral arrogance by those who claim to know what God wants, but spend too much time talking to God and too little time listening to the Spirit within.  But in reality, any directive that elicits guilt remains in the realm of mind and has solely to do with cultural trappings which are learned. Mind should no more be elevated above body than body should be elevated above mind. Both must work in concert in order to serve spirit. The instillation and manipulation of guilt is a heinous, power-stealing practice, which misses the message of emotion entirely.  It is designed to replace emotion and self-direction, while retaining control of others under the guise of spiritual development. In fact, "spirit" is not given its due, but rather relegated to the "back of the bus" while someone else does the driving.  Humans should pay particular attention to any idea which invokes guilt feelings and identify the underlying needs which are at issue. The concept of a guilty conscience should be changed to the more accurate guilty mind. Then they should wholeheartedly reject any doctrine or idea that does not embrace the divinity of their God-given nature. Humans are no more meant to experience lingering guilt, than they are meant to experience lingering anger, fear, or sadness. Acting purposefully upon all emotional signals can allow humans to remove the limitations that created the signals so that they can attain the intended lingering state---that of joyous loving spiritual fulfillment.  Guilt, when lumped in with "anger, fear or sadness" is keeping company with those qualities that were never meant to be a part of a human's experience in this physical environment or anywhere else. Once this is realized and accepted, the true role of body, mind and spirit can proceed unhindered.  Learning Error vs Sin  Guilt, like all emotional signals, should be recognized for its role in the learning cycle of self-development. Sin is simply an error in trial and error learning wherein feeling signals evaluate action outcomes.Course correction begins with feeling signals that follow mistakes or successes.  I'm not sure why one would need to make a "course correction" following a "success", but the point of the above is that one need not take an error (especially a sin) so seriously that the accepted consequence would be eternal punishment. The point of life is to learn and develop, not to serve as the focal point for some sadist, especially One who is regarded as a Supreme Being.  The flexibility within natural morality, complete with the Grace of the Creator, ensures that humans can easily recover from the inevitable mistakes. Even humans acting within all three purposes can easily perpetuate minor violations upon themselves or others, simply because they are in need of further self-development. If each individual greets the actions of others with humor, faith, compassion, tolerance, forgiveness, and expressions of light, the learning error is quickly overcome and all concerned are restored to the purposeful track.  If we can grant the same open-mindedness to our fellow human beings as we would like them to grant to us when we err, as we surely do, then progression toward perfection can be much less painful.  Purposeful self-development will break the cycle of self-preservationary violation and liberate humanity from such limiting self-concepts such as evil and sin. All sin is simply learning error, on the road to strategies that satisfy all three purposes simultaneously.  There is currently a generation in place that was brought up under the guidelines of "sin & punishment" and all the trappings that keep this mentality in place. Those who have rejected the illogical mindset of these dictums have been left with little else to turn to except indifference or "cultism".  Sin is simply a misstep from which important learning can be attained. It is not an inherent flaw within the design of the human being, for which any relative deity must die in order to save souls. Such terms as sin and evil arose only because they served the limited purpose of providing temporary meaning. They offered believable explanations for when humans choose hurtful behavior. But they evidence a great distortion of the early messages, wherein the message became the answer, not the message of self-understanding itself.  Thus, what was meant to be the creation of a system of understanding and enlightenment, deteriorated into a personality cult, with control integrated into a sophisticated system of wealth and power. Such were the patterns woven into a blanket of security. Crawling out from under this "blanket" has been particularly difficult until now.  The Power Of Apology & Forgiveness  The religious message that humans who follow divine dictates will be "forgiven for their sins" carries this distortion. On the other hand, it also has spiritual utility, for forgiveness does indeed mesh with divine intention. But it is not the religious dictates that make this true, it is because forgiveness brings powerfully positive feelings both to the forgiver and the forgivee. Forgiveness is a right and purposeful strategy because it brings divine pleasure. It is a life-giving habit.  Those who ask for "forgiveness" are in need of returning a state of balance created by error. Those who grant "forgiveness" when asked for it, sense a touch of their own divine nature. Hence, the old saying: To err is human - To forgive is Divine.  But forgiveness does not mean that humans can do any old thing, and rest on their laurels because they can forgive themselves and others for any indiscretion. This attitude toward forgiveness only breeds further feelings of self-reproach, for it is the lazy man's way to the light. Apology and forgiveness take on very powerful meaning in the context of accountability. Most any learning error, even violation can be redeemed when apologies contain an expressive, active effort to restore the one violated to his former state or to one even better. Cultural forms of restitution flow from this truth, yet they include anger and retaliation rather than true forgiveness and restoration of grace.  When we err against another, we create a state of emotional imbalance in the offendee, a state that requires correction for the offender and the offendee to return to their prior relationship. To improve that relationship, which should be the goal of all humans in "relation" to other humans, an opportunity for "betterment" is at hand. We are moving in that direction when we ask criminals to consider an apology to their victims.  True expressions of regret spring from the higher state of understanding, from the learning that followed the violation; they come from the heart. The receiver knows when this is the case, for they will resonate to the apology and offer forgiveness. Not only is the offender accountable to expressively apologize to the offendee, but the offendee is also accountable to receive these expressions as if he sought forgiveness himself. True connection with another recognizes the pitfalls of humanity and does not assume evil intent; for the learning error is inevitable and the shoe will soon be on the other foot. If all humans embrace the nature of trial and error learning and utilize the life-giving habits, then all will be forgiven and can quickly restore themselves upon the destiny path. Rest assured, far fewer violations will occur when this is the normal state of humanity.  Another consequence of this "giant step for mankind" will be an escape from in the guilt-fear-hate-anger box we've created for ourselves.  The Historical States Of Moral Interaction  It is helpful to instill universal forgiveness for human frailty upon understanding that certain stages of moral development dictate different moral actions of their day. Competition was once the moral choice, for biological predestiny utilizes competition to effect human evolutionary movement. We will later discuss this in detail, but for now understand that the only true original sin is in lingering within early stages of human moral development.  Where once life was a struggle for the survival of the human species, it has evolved to a point where fighting for one's daily food is no longer a sole or even primary activity.  Biological predestiny is hardwired into all species as an orienting mechanism, each interacting in the overall evolutionary process. The essential dynamic is how an individual organism is moved from within to survive in any given environment. This movement might come from generic predisposition or adaptive mutation in other organisms, but in humans, it comes from free will. With all humans buzzing about with everyone pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain, there are bound to be some bumping into one another. When this happens they can willfully choose to either interact competitively or cooperatively. Free will is meant to be guided by the innate morality within the wisdom of spirit, which means to operate within all three purposes, and act upon the emotional signals in their multiple levels of meaning.  When a great number of people occupy a dance floor, each couple can start competing for available space by banging into other couples OR all couples can start coordinating their movements so that contact can be reduced to a minimum and not considered to be threatening behavior. Only in a square dance is it necessary to have a source of outside control.  There is then a natural moral progression from the singular self-concept to the plural connected self-concept. At each stage of moral development there will be certain needs coming to the fore, as well as an evolving understanding of the meaning of the emotional signals. Until humans awaken to the power of free will, they are safeguarded against their ignorant choices of mind by the self-preservationary reactions of body---serving the first stage of human purpose.  As technology advances and weapons of war become more sophisticated, the need for resolving the proverbial "bumping into one another" in an agreed upon fashion, becomes increasingly essential to self-preservation. Clearly, the old guidelines of inter-relationship will not suffice.  Caveman Morality  At this first stage, humans respond exactly like other animals, influenced first and foremost by emotional memory and hardwired instinctual responses. This relates to the human pre-cultural "caveman" level of morality. Humans at this stage are likened unto singular, lone wolves, competing against one another for scarce resources, be they food, land, power, money, etc. With competition, there is a win-lose outcome: one will get all of the resource, and the other will get none. At this stage, fear and anger are the predominant motivators, fight and flight are the common actions, as the stronger often overpowers the weaker to the victor goes the spoils. At this level self-preservation is the singular purpose, the level of conscience now known as "selfish".  There are still many (too, many) in our society today whose conduct would have a certain commonality matching the above described characteristics. In fact, the corporate mentality would likely come the closest. On a singular level, many women might recognize a former or current suitor.  At this early, pre-cultural stage, competition is the right and good choice of action, due to the fact that the individual needs take precedence over the group needs. The emotional signals are interpreted to ensure survival and that the basic individual needs for power, freedom and creative expression are honored. Once these needs are accommodated in the mind and world of such humans, then the other needs can come to the forefront of consciousness and motivate further evolution.  Thus, in some ancient but more sophisticated cultures, even though technology had not come close to what we have today, there grew a very in-depth understanding of the arts. The Greeks had finely tuned the mind and what followed then served as testimony to what could be accomplished, when leisure was achieved. Unfortunately, a certain level of social "slavery" was necessary to maintain that state of leisure for the selected few.  For competition is not the only choice when humans interact. The resource can go to one, or to another, or it can be shared by both. The sharing is known ascooperation. The emergence of cooperation is inevitable, for the need for interconnection is built into the human system in many other ways. For example, the cooperation necessary for procreation becomes an immediate hint of the higher, more rewarding approaches. Images of pre-cultural females dragged into the caves conjure still valid emotional signals that simply could not have allowed the lone wolf lifestyles to continue for long.  Thus, was born the "romantic" concept which still serves as a mystery to many of the male species.  Cooperative Morality  In answer to the connection need, humans begin to develop the mind to include others in the self-concept. This ushered in the secondary cooperative level of conscience wherein self-development and right responses became the moral action choice, in lieu of fight and flight. Thus, the earliest forms of cooperation began to flourish, resulting in shared culture that would bring a lasting condition of interdependence. With cooperation, there is a win-win outcome. Although neither will get all, both will get half. The trade-off of receiving only half the spoils comes from the emotional reward of connection, and in the increased ability to gain through subsequent cooperation.  In fact, what tends to evolve from cooperation is not only the sharing of what is, but a realization that the whole of society can be more than the sum of its parts, providing that the spirit is an invited ingredient.  At this stage, the higher "group needs" are considered in addition to the basic individual needs. Emotional signals begin to take on the added meaning of self-development of mind and to embrace the group connection need, the need for meaning and the need to achieve esteem-building expressions among others. Loving connection, and the fulfillment from meaningful, creative expression become the dominant motivations as right and light responses become dominant action choices.  Getting beyond the mere acquisition of material items and worldly titles leads to an appreciation of nature, knowledge and the spiritual qualities of other human beings. When allowed and encouraged, this can bring the proverbial heaven down to earth.  Before this stage is fully attained, some will still choose to compete, while others begin to cooperate. At this transitional state, there is both the chance to win-lose, or to negotiate a win-win. When some trust others to cooperate, and those others breach the trust and compete, win-lose and disruption occurs. In this stage, cooperation is the right and good, the correct moral choice, and those who compete at the expense of the cooperative other are thought of as cheats. Thus, external rules and laws to protect the cooperators from cheats become necessary.  In that delicate stage when the "cheaters" are on the wane but still in control of most of the wealth and power, those who make the rules will favor them. And so long as the methods whereby the "rule-makers" attain and hold their positions are stacked in favor of the wealth/power group, the "cooperators" will be required to make an end-run to tip the balance in their favor. But, eventually, the "100th monkey" principle will prevail, for it is a principle of Universal Law.  The third and ultimately necessary stage is wherein allcompetition between humans gives way to true cooperation: all self-expression is accomplished in the context of cooperation. This is truly civilized morality. All emotional signals are interpreted within all three purposes, and all six needs are accommodated. All major motivations spring from the approach emotional signals and the avoidant ones are rare, corrective and evolutionary signals. In this final stage, each emotional signal is fully understood within the connection between all. To hurt another would equally hurt the self, this is the complete and mature state of moral development. This is the healthy conscience. Violations need not be controlled, because they simply occur only as learning missteps and are met with tolerance, compassion and offers of light.  There are many places in existence right now where much progress has been made toward the above-described ideal state. But these settings are often more rural than urban and the population is much less condensed.  But transition to this stage is not yet complete. The movement away from fear and anger toward hope and trust is now occurring. Human groupings have not sufficiently embraced the self knowledge, and even enlightened individuals are stymied in their cooperative efforts by a world that embraces and declares competition to be "the way." Spiritual frustration is experienced at every turn. To end this cycle and embrace cooperation, one must understand the necessity of moving from fear, to trust.  ...and I very much look forward to the next title: The Role Of Trust.  The Role of Trust  This macrocosm of humanity can be reduced to the microcosm of moral interactions between two human beings. Interactions will be motivated by pain until pleasure takes its rightful place. Fear is the dominant motivator in the stage of competition. Moving from competition to cooperation is based upon mutual trust. Trust is a necessary perquisite for cooperative moral action. For the cave woman could just as easily have slit the man's throat with his stone knife while he slept, as she could have arisen early to build him a comforting fire.  But, in order for the relationship to survive, it was essential that some level of trust be maintained. Along with this "trust" was the accepted presumption that each cared about the other, sufficiently to maintain the relationship and procreate, going on to establish that trust as a pattern for their offspring to learn and accept.  Trust is a touchy thing, for in a win-lose competition, one who violates the cooperative trust can nearly always emerge victor of the spoils. Thus, there is always room for violation to exploit vulnerability inherent in trust. It is very easy to take advantage of the trust of another. Yet, it always comes with the price of living in fear, isolation and loneliness, not to mention facing the wrathful anger of the violated one. Fear and the self-preservationary impulse alone never brings true fulfillment until the body's needs are fulfilled in the context of spiritual connection. Despite this fact, those who retain a singular concept of self, and choose to compete and endure such feelings will certainly lose out when competing with groups choosing cooperation. Fear driven strategies will ensure a hellish fearful existence.  The untrusting, lone-wolf personality will never successfully compete with those who know the value of trust and can make it a productive part of their lives. Not only does it lead to cooperation but, more importantly, to an acquaintance with the feeling aspect of human character.  Until the pleasurable path of trust can be truly embraced, humans are relegated to the transitional stage between fearful competition and faithful cooperation, between self-preservation and self-development, between the purposes of mind and body, with conflicts resulting both internally and externally.  The good news is that while we are still in that "transitional" period we appear to be moving toward "trust" and away from "fear". However, this trend will only continue so long as our faith in the divine nature of all things continues to grow.  A major influence upon this condition has to do with the economics of scarce resources. When there are insufficient resources to be shared, fear will motivate competition. Resources are most scarce when there is overpopulation, or when communities do not have equitable systems for the freedom and empowerment of their members. Moral progress can also go backwards---when resources are scarce, cooperation gives way to competition. (Since humans have become the dominant species and exercise free will in cultural transformation upon the ecosystem, they have taken on the responsibility to ensure fair allocation of resources to any embodied spirit, of all species, or they will feel the competitive results).  It is only through cooperation that resources can be shared in a way that reduces the competitive atmosphere and reduces the fear and mistrust that tend to creep into relationships. The law of abundance is simply confirmation that nature is in place to supply all of our needs, whether they be material or spiritual.  Tit-For-Tat Morality  Thus, morality is inextricably entangled with opportunity, and these predictable stages can point to the social changes necessary. Until adequate opportunity occurs, however, there will be a rather fixed state of affairs. This state brings a correspondingly predictable stage of morality. One in which there is a stand-off between the negative, competitive and the positive, cooperative impulses where many animal species, and the majority of humanity, is now poised. This pattern can be seen through the entire animal kingdom, wherein varying stages of competitive and cooperative efforts yield the most success for the species.  It is the less spiritually developed of the human species who take their cue from the animal species most preoccupied with the competitive strategies, hence the colloquial expression: "It's a dog eat dog world!" This belief reinforces the type of behavior least admired in humans.  This pattern is a mish-mash of both, wherein a moral rule of thumb is as follows: First, attempt cooperation. If the other cooperates, then both can win. Next, if the other chooses to break the trust and compete against you, you will lose to him. But your task is to then withdraw your cooperation with him and deal with another (more honorable) fellow, and the first will lose your help, becoming isolated. Eventually he will come calling again, following a learning experience. Trust again, and if he has truly learned, he will cooperate. The feeling signals all around will reward this more purposeful path, and the group effort will be stronger than any one isolated effort.  This is a good "rule" but not always an easy one to follow, as many will regard this as a weakness on the part of the one who is taken advantage of by the one who has broken the trust. But trust is a two-way street and patience is essential to educating the untrustworthy to the ultimate value of it.  This pattern is also apparent in the animal community, but they do not have the mental abilities of humans to remember and plan interactions as thoughtfully. The body alone, via the feeling system, guides their choices. In this case, the animal has memory enough to recall only the emotional outcome of the previous interaction. It is very common for such mindless violators to come around again with every intention of perpetuating another violation, for the previous winning of all the spoils felt great. But the duped one also recalls his own emotional outcome, one of sadness over the loss and anger over the violation. He then plans on doing the same himself, perpetuating a violation back upon the violator, in an "I'll show you how it feels" retaliation.  This is where emotion must eventually be put aside or overridden in order to break the eye-for-an-eye rule that can only deteriorate into an environment of never-ending conflict.  This is called the tit-for-tat strategy that works best when competition has not been completely overcome. In this case, the violator comes calling with an offer of a second cooperation and trusts the first. The first in this case, violates the trust and wins the spoils for himself. The second round often reinforces the soundness of the cooperative choice within the original violator and promotes cooperation in future interactions. Otherwise, fear and anger drives a perpetual cycle of getting even---a deadly habit among humans. Tit-for-tat means simply: First cooperate, and then in any subsequent interaction, do the same as the other formerly did to you.  The best you can say for this strategy is that it has the potential for being educational for those who are in need of learning the value of cooperation from an emotional experience. The danger in it is that the violator may not get beyond anger to a more enlightened state.  Although tit-for-tat has its place, humans are intended to discover their higher moral guidance. They are not simply limited to the emotional memory of the experience, they can invoke the mind. If the higher purposes are heeded, trust outweighs fear, the connection is preserved, and winning half---plus the emotional reward of connection---brings repeated cooperation that yields far more long-term benefit for all concerned. The less cooperation among all species, the more fear and self-preservation will be apparent.The more spiritual connection that exists, the more trust and cooperation can be observed, and more faith and personal fulfillment is experienced.  Sometimes, a group is encouraged to cooperate in order to exercise and take a competitive and unfair advantage of another group. This moves a less-than-virtuous activity from a singular to a plural mindset and, in doing so, only strengthens a non-spiritual form of conduct.  Understanding the patterns of competition and cooperation can help individuals determine the moral course of action when dealing with others who are driven by competition alone, as well as underscore the most spiritually rewarding choice of cooperation. It should be readily apparent, however, that humans who keep to their fear-driven competitive level of self-preservation are no more evolved than the animals over which they claim superiority.    When "competition" becomes such a virtue in a society that it is an end in itself, than the only resolution of such an outlook is for the system to have a major breakdown. Because material success is often regarded as the ultimate end and key to happiness, the hardwired qualities in humans lead them to such a consequence on a major scale.  The Golden Rule  With these historical interactions in perspective, we can now see how they led to early forms of moral guidance. This first step from competition to cooperation was captured in the early moral directive: "As ye would that men should do to you, do to them likewise." This reflected the tit-for-tat strategy of the animal kingdom and the human desire to overcome the cycle of retaliation. For to follow this directive, both would initially cooperate rather than to go through a wasteful series of competitive retaliations. This directive is still inherent in most major religions, commonly known as the Golden Rule. It has also been restated:  "Do unto others, that which you would have them do unto you".  This moral advice has endured because it dovetails with many elements of innate natural morality. The Golden Rule assumes that there are some universal right and wrong behaviors, clearly understandable by all humans---which there are. It assumes that all humans can recognize "rightness" within others and in themselves---which they can through their feeling system. It is right-minded, basing morality upon the emotional evaluation of the act, and the purposeful pursuit of happiness.  It also appeals to everyone's self interest and, thus, ties one's well being to one's own actions. But, one hopes that the other person will agree to and accept the same Code of Conduct.  But this rule is only part of the picture, and its use as a moral directive is limited. For it assumes that everyone has the same values, which is never the case in a multicultural diverse world. It does not embrace the free will given to each human being to design values and beliefs according to their individual spirit. (What brings happiness to a member of one culture, might bring great unhappiness to a member of another.) It embraces the contrived emotional boundaries which result from lack of continuous development of mind. It honors only those with similar, local values, and does not embrace the entirety of connected humanity. (It is quite easy to do horrible things unto others, if one does not consider certain humans as "others"---witness the Holocaust).  One of the first steps in doing harmful things to another is to dehumanize the other person. Governments are usually very successful in doing this in times of war. It makes it much easier to accept the idea of killing the "enemy" if he is accepted as a "chink" or a "gook". It has made the practice of racism easier when people formed support groups to terrorize segments of the population. Even parts of the bible can be used to justify hate and worked well in many minds for quite some time until "higher" laws prevailed.  Nonetheless, with some simple variant twists, it can be a far more useful moral tool at the current state of the moral development of the species. The first twist would be to recognize it in the context of all humans, indeed to every spiritual embodiment, not just humans within any specific spiritual grouping. This fully honors the connection need, bringing all spirits together in the self-concept, making it a truly universal dictate.  An example of this might be the acceptance that "All life is sacred." This could lead to a higher level of respect for both humankind, as well as all of nature. Once this connection was made, threats to the environment would become manageable and life on the planet would be more valuable and enjoyable.  This brings the next essential universal twist which adds far more sweeping application. This flips the rule around to utilize avoidant impulses as universal guidance, using what humans don't like as a guide. Although a wide variety of diverse ideas, strategies and choices, can bring pleasure, it is the truly universal limitations and frustrations of spirit that bring pain. With these added understandings, this golden advice becomes far more useful in the form:  "Do not do unto any others that which pains thyself."  This most simple of moral guidance allows humans to know in any moment what not to do and it frees the feelings of spirit to lead them toward actions to which they are morally invited---indeed divinely destined.  One need only imagine how one would feel as the recipient of any contemplated action against another, and allow that "feeling" to guide his/her actions henceforth.  The final word about natural morality is that it suggests that far fewer controls need to be placed upon human beings. Instead, energy and resources should be invested in ensuring that there is adequate opportunity for each member to meet needs without competitive impulses coming to the fore. Humans can simply let go of all ideas about what is right and wrong and allow their spirits to guide them. The self-righteous ones must step aside, taking their cultural judgements with them, and allow each human the dignity, the privacy, and the freedom to pursue happiness in their own way. For vitality and behavior, when chosen within all three purposes, which does not frustrate any of the essential needs, nor intend to consciously violate another, and is chosen within the response rules, is moral in the eyes of the Creator.  We are all familiar with a four-way intersection, controlled by a stop sign at each corner. Each driver waits his/her turn and trusts that when he/she starts into the intersection, it will be safe to do so. Now suppose that the "stop signs" were removed and the rule of common courtesy was in place. Would the system not work just as well? It would be a small step but essential to the building of a less abrasive society.  With these essentials of right action in place, we can now look more closely at human to human personal interactions.  Table of Contents