Verifying knowledge

Central concept 2 - knowledge changes what ethical decisions are - necessarily leads to central concept 3: Ethics force us to verify knowledge



  Ethics force us to verify knowledge


A terrible ethical question for a doctor in 1848: Were the conclusions of Dr. Semmelweis's study right or wrong? Have I unknowingly killed or endangered patients with my previous behaviour? This intolerable uncertainty should immediately have resulted in large-scale clinical studies. In short: ethics force us to verify knowledge.

  Climate change through Co2 has been known about since 1896


What Dr. Semmelweis was for doctors who didn't wash their hands, climate change through greenhouse gas emissions is today for everyone who emits CO2 by burning fossil fuels. But in the first publication on the subject by Svante Arrhenius, a warmer climate was regarded as a positive development.

A topic of such overwhelming importance should have been investigated immediately. How much climate change is acceptable, what are the consequences? The issue should have been addressed all over the world. Presumably we would have become aware of the dangers involved in climate change at a much earlier stage. Already in 1914 or in 1938 at the latest, the first climate conferences on reducing CO2 emissions should have taken place.

  Illustration in the ethics diagram


Fill in two variants. The issue is thoroughly researched, or it is not researched. What are the consequencees of ignorance? Ignorance can have such serious consequences in this case that central concept 3 - "Ethics forces us to verify knowledge" becomes obligatory.

Philosophy Philosophy
Long-term planning and stability have to be the guiding rules of politics. A philosophy based on the mathematic branch of games theory.




  Ethics


Ethics is the science of survival. Surprising analyses of what is ethical and unethical. Ethics that correspond to survival or downfall in the real world.

Ethics as the logics of survival
Survival as the target, ethics as the science of implementing this target. Of course, we must then define who, how and over what time period survival refers to in this context.


Cosmic threat for mankind: meteorites
According to game theory, the task of intelligent life is to protect the home planet from catastrophes. Let's look at the ethics related to this.


Civilization decision
Back to the simple life or on to a hightech civilization? An ethics evaluation gives a clear answer to the course that should be taken.


Knowledge brings change
Central concept 1: Knowledge is a prerequisite for ethics. Knowledge is thus able to change the bases of decisions laid by ethics.


If everybody would do this
Consequences for the areas of survival family, group and mankind. An estimation of consequences always starts with the question ''If everybody did this...''.


Division of labour in society
Can each individual engage in ethics to such an extent that they can work out a complete answer to each basic situation in their life by themselves?


Organisation of society
A society should be organized in such a way that the science of survival, called ethics, is in harmony with the generally accepted views of society.


Ethics for groups
The guidelines for a group should be configured in such a way that the decisions of individuals are influenced in a direction that is of benefit for the group.




Context description:  politics political