Wednesday, July 25, 2012

On the Survialistic Morality of Social Justice

Provided with the fundamental requirements for life being survival we understand morality to be a dichotomy of consequences, being decided or intended upon by a person, or naturally occurring, with a valence of care/harm or positive/neutral/negative to self or other.

In general this theory proposes that greatest good comes from the production of essential commodities for essential needs. Prioritized from the greatest positive, benefit, and from the avoidance of death, or near death actuality (sickness, pain).

Ultimately, this idea is altruistic rationalism. We develop a moral judgment based on what we think should be avoided or desired.

The justice system of America, legitimizes positive or rational law. It attempts to prevent negative consequences from reproducing or repeating, by imprisoning or killing criminals that have acted out a behavior -- so determined by social justice.

Behaviors are classified as criminal as far as they hurt the condition or lessen the condition of life for others. Behaviors are classified as rewarding, as so far as they have qualification and work in relation to some form of production. According to this theory, as mentioned above, the most rewards a employee should obtain is from being in relation to the amount of production created by their work. This makes more sense than paying entertainers more than farmers.

Hn  = Pn Harm intensity equals punishment.
Cn = Rn  Care intensity equals reward.

These are general equations of reciprocation, and are not true in all conditions.

This is not always the case, as harm is done to prey of human beings, so as to live. Therefore there is a necessary prey-predator harm, that results in care.  There may even be a harm-harm condition between prey-predator as the offensive defenses of prey may retaliate with harm to the predator.

In this condition, the less death one imposes on animals, limited to consumption rates, the more care that is supplied. Man's relation to himself is not thought to be a condition of harm --> care, as in rewarding those who do harm. Those that punish, who may be considered to be harming the criminal are in actuality care for the populace and attempting to correct the aberrant behavior. In this sense un punishment may be considered punishment --> benefit, and in this sense harm cares for the populace and government officials.

Harm --> care explicit (sadism), is what would be what I call a "contrary state of justice" or "irrationalism" where harm unto one another is rewarded. Harm --> care implicitly, is rational, as punishment --> earnings (justice system). In some ways punishment may decrease liberty, but is also a corrective form changing a negative agent into a positive agent. In this way, punishment isn't really a harm at all.

If prisoners were tortured or inflicted with some form of pain, rather than just their loss of liberty, the justice system would work by not restraining harm unto harm. Criminality followed by torture, is what I would call malicious justice. These can be related to the moral system or justice symtem thought to exist by some religious people. Except it follows that even though you are good (produce, care, peace, happiness) you punishment is torture in hell. This is what I would call malicious injustice, according to an understanding of biology and its relation to the consequences that can effect life.

This is actually what happens during war, as well as the end of punishing harm caused by a criminal which equals an income for the legal enforcers (harm-->punishment-->care).  In this condition man is a predator to himself. Where those that harm others are prey to the government which is a predatory democratic government PDG. Not prey in the way one might normally know of it, not as something which is eaten, but rather the prey is something which harmed. As in the usage, "prey on little children." The predators, abusers, sadists, are themselves predators, so one might consider the punishment of these predators as predators against predators. There is no real use in understanding crime and punishment in this way, it just goes to show that harm leads to punishment, and that punishment leads to care within the system of justice.

This kind of justice (rationalism) is matter of imprisoning, taking liberty away from the "agent of harm". The government  gives man a task of being obedient to the laws so as to make profit, as well as generate care, peace, and happiness. When one refuses to generate the positive, the ultimatum is the generation of negative. The generation of harm by an agent of harm, is punishable by the PDG, so as to prevent the existence of further harm, greater than the "harm of punishment" (which in its can be beneficial as 1. Preventing harm. 2. Correcting behavior 3.Financing the work of PDG enforcers and judges).

In the condition of war or revolution a group of people is harmed by another group of people. The winning side is the side that can punish, kill, or destroy one side, because of greater armed forces. Though war is mostly harm-harm, and individually is harm-harm, on a marco-scale, there is always some one profiting from providing weapons of war or enforcement of the PDG ideals. All costs equal someone else's profits.

In+Wn/In+wn = Pw

Infantry, plus weapon power, divided by others, equals probability of winning war. The strongest force are likely to overcome the weaker forces.

How could we eliminate the care or profit that comes from punishing criminals? In capitalism it isn't possible, nor in any system. Why is this? The criminal himself, because of potential repetition of their misbehavior, is causing more harm than those punishing the criminal. In order to eliminate benefit from penal system, it would require the end of crime, the end of harming others. Such a world is not entirely possible, and therefore man will use government to punish (harm) those that do harm, and benefit from it. This kind of order could be considered somewhat rational, as the product of penal conviction is an essence an attempt to attenuate harm from the people and in doing so gain benefit.

How can crime rate be lowered? I think there are multiple factors that work to condition man into behaviors that are obedient to the general will of the people (peace and prosperity). Examples of modeling coming from the environment are critical in understanding how criminality can be prevented. 1. Parents 2. Media 3. Social connections/community 3. Education access 4. Occupational access are some of the leading opportunities which employ man into acting according to the economic system of rewarding ends. It is the responsibility of every man to implicitly care for others. Punishment that catches the behaviors after the effect, are less powerful in eliminating crime than early intervention, as is true in catching any disease in its early stages.

Although it may be debated that there is an initial harm done to those that experience sexual encounters having no information of sexual engagement, this theory doesn't account for the punishment of pedophiles.

It also does not include the parting of savings after a divorce, or the responsibility placed on one parent or the other. Though, one could consider fair parting of property to be in the interest of both parties, and giving long care privileges to the parent that is more nurturing.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Relationship, Emotional communication, & Utility judgments


From a limbic system to frontal cortex system causation, we can think of all behaviors, people, and things as being susceptible to some kind of mental force.

If we refer to categorization of emotions chart, we will find that any event can have an emotional association. The biological trend, being positive emotion (desire) for care/benefit/gain of positive, and negative emotion (aversion) being for hurt/detriment/loss of negative.

There is also a ratio when too much care turns into a negative thing for a person, which itself might depend on one's resistance to the officiousness of another.

When a person (A) has negative reactions to another person's attributes(B), the person A will be avoidant to the person, as long as attribute or emotional association is made.  (ΔA,B) =Δ+F/Δ-F/(ΔAttr).

As the intensity of either positive or negative emotion increases the subjects in the relationship will tend to form a stronger or weaker bond.

Every attribute of a person can have a positive or negative emotional charge from self or other. S(attr) = F

Other (B) may be in the relationship when person A has more positively associated attributes than negative.

-f/+f(An) = (-relationship,+relationship)

Bio-quantum-theromdyanimcs of relationship:
N-F(S)/N-F(O) = Increased chance of collapse or entropy of relationship.
N+F(S)/N+F(O) = Increased chance of propagation or decreased entropy of relation.

Emotional communication:
A) Positive

Approval -- A person communicates that accept the other. "I like you. I like your shirt. I like your voice." There is a trend that is An = +F amount of approval equals positive feeling. The two correlate, not actually equal one another.

Positive Grade -- Uses a positive adjective, or comparison (better, best). "I like you, because you amaze me. I like your shirt, because it artistic. I like your voice, its one of the best I have ever heard. Etc.."

Encouragement -- Encouragement works as communicated agreement of ends. E= S/O = (Endsn) "I know you can. I believe that you can do anything you want. Etc." There is a trend where the more Enc. the more likely the other is to do something.

B) Negative

Rejection -- A person communicates they reject the other. "I don't like you. I don't like your shirt. I hate your voice. There is a trend that is Rn=-F amount of rejection correlates to negative feeling. Negative feeling is equal to discouragement, which is equal to possibility of avoidance of end.

Negative Grade -- Uses a negative adjective, or comparison (worse). "I don't like you, because you are arrogant. I don't like your shirt, its weird. I think your voice is the worst I have ever heard."

Discourage -- The opposite of encouragement.

Utility judgment:

Hedonic Calculus --
Variables, or vectors, of the pleasures and pains included in this calculation, which Bentham called "elements" or "dimensions", were:
Intensity: How strong is the pleasure? i+f=+n
Duration: How long will the pleasure last? t1+n = +n
Certainty or uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
Propinquity or remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur? T = +n/-n
Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind. P = 1 < -n/+n
Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind. P < = -n/+n
Extent: How many people will be affected? = Pn

The problem with these simplistic calculations is that there are other variables involved, such as want and need. Essentially, the order in which the a product cares for something is equal to its utility. Food that lacks energy to prepare losses its utility, where as food that can be prepared with energy gains utility, in the supply of two needs energy+food there is utility+utility. We could take this equation as an example, and multiple it by Pn (people). The more people that are satisfied by utility (needed) the better the condition of the people (with out other variables involved).

Categorization of Positive and Negative Emotion


A) Care/pleasure/love - affection, giving, lust, love, infatuation.
B) Care/gain of positive - content, happiness, elation, bliss.
C) Gain of relationship positive - friend, family member, mate.
D) Interest --zest, thrill.
E,F) Desire for existence - relief, accept, want, crave, obsess/need.
G) Success - pride, triumph.
H) Neglect - Lack of provisions, and affection.
J) Optimism/Hope is positive future tense consciousness, that should exist in the prediction of anything positive that may happen in the future.
K) Forgiveness


-A) Threat/pain - anxiety, fear, horror, torment.
-B) Loss of Positive - Sadness.
-C) Gain of relationship - dislike, animosity, enemy (hate).
-D) Boredom - dullness, stark.
-E) Desire for non-existence -Annoyance, Frustration, Anger, Rage.
-F) Desire for non-existence/avoidance - Dislike, rejection, disgust, contempt, loathing.
-G) Failure- shame (trigger rejection), regret.
-H)Too caring - officious.
-J) Cynicism - Is an expectation, a negative future tense consciousness, that should exist triggered by anything that could cause negativity that might happen in the future.
-K) Grudge, revenge.

Surprise can be -/+, depending on the trigger.

Sympathy - is sadness with an ideal hope that things could have gone in the favor of the target.

Empathy is both +/- -- a reflection of the other person's feelings. This can change dramatically, when more than two people are entered into the setting. Say as two men who fight another man. The person may empathize with either side, or one side over the other, in attempts to eliminate cognitive dissonance.

Sunday, July 22, 2012


Mental neutrality is possible, but when you are looking at or describing anything without judging it with your emotion, you are still being controlled by quantum forces, which dictate whether or not you collapse the observation into memory or give longer attention to it.

Before judging how an outcome will occur, one might consider starting with a 0 base than considering the possible effects from choosing an outcome over the other/or not doing it.

Ex: Taking a shower:
Does it cause a negative or positive reaction? The very act of acting for an end, must make the end desired. If there is a negative, or aversive reaction, the end is not desired. The generation of the behavior takes work not only desire.

In this way, in theory one can start from 0, and propagate an outcome, that is select an outcome that will give the self an emotional reaction.

Ex: Hug your son:
Will your son be annoyed (a) or reciprocate affection (b) ? Before you give the hug you can ask the person how they might react, or if they want to the same ends you are after, being in this example affection. You may act with this knowledge, and so desire or not desire reciprocated affection.

In this same way communication is key to knowing how to interpersonally function, give or take affection, ignore, talk to, knowing if some one is angry because of something done, etc.

Now it may not be possible to alway start at a zero-point when making judgments or decisions, as:
1. Some decisions are made without thinking about how they will effect you, at a conscious level.
2. Some decisions are made because of being conditioned to do them, say as a habit. In this way too, the habit may not even be thought of as something done because of being conditioned to do it.

Quantum Consciousness

 Observation causes a continuous propagation of wave-functions.

An experience equals having propagated a wave-function. The propagation of a previous wave-function, equals a correspondence with the event.

A question from person A asks a person to propagate a memory of experience x:

"Did x happen?"

If x did, or didn't happen depends on if x was propagated by the observer in a past experience.

x's validity = past propagation

If person A asks person B what happened and they have not observed what happened to B, validity of x increases in uncertainty.

Observation = Increase in certainty.

Will x happen?

1. Personal -- An event will happen depending on the ability of the person to do and choice to do x.
2. Non-personal -- An event will happen according to physical laws of the interacting systems.

Not doing x:
The entropy/collapse of a wave-function equals intensity of aversion as a ratio to pleasure of the wave function.

Doing x:
The decreased entropy/propagation of wave-function equals to intensity of pleasure in ratio to the aversion to to the wave function.

Knowledge an Inequality

When we know something, it is because of experience of the thing in a past situation.

There are:

1. First impressions and classifications of things. (word-sound-obeject association)

2. Recall of past impressions.

Idea is made to equal stimulus by first impressions. Number two, can be shown to be an equation of I=S, idea equals stimulus. This means that all qualities and things can equal the idea of them. The concept holds the attributes or the things essence, and the idea will either equal or not equal the stimulus. In order for positive correspondence to take place (valid cognition -- truth) idea must equal stimulus. When I doesn't equal S there is negative correspondence (invalid cognition -- lie).

From this it follows that all ideas exist as inequality relationships to stimulus. All ideas are concepts properties or concepts of things. When a stimulus triggers the concepts they must be equal to the idea in order for correspondence to exist. This means, that we can represent all qualities and things mathematically. When the stimulus has a number of qualities that equal the concept of the thing, than the thing is known (positive correspondence exists).

This proves that we might be able to formulate a mathematical system for correspondence of the properties of things. For this to be achieved, properties will be numerical, and the sum of properties will equal thing. Pn = T, properties equal thing.

The same applies to word association. W = S = I word equals stimulus, which equals idea. The word equals the stimulus or idea, because of the association of the word with the stimulus with them. Pn = T = Wn Total properties equal the thing, which equal the total definitions (words) of it.

According to my law of relative sound association, any sound can be used to trigger the idea. According to the law of non-ambiguity, a sound can not represent two different qualities or things without causing cognitive dissonance (W = I1, I2 =Cd). For example: If the sound "red" was equal to two different stimulus it would trigger two different ideas. For the sound-association to have a specific idea, the sound (word) that triggers that idea must not be triggered by a word associated with multiple ideas. For positive sound correspondence to exist Wn = I = S (words must equal stimulus by triggering the idea of it).

According to the law of Hebbian neuro-logical habit, the likelihood of a word triggering idea is equal to the number of times the word triggered the idea. Wn +nT (S=I) = SWa (word + ntimes associated with stimulus or idea equals strength of word association. There may be a certain level of strength to an associate where the word is associated with the idea or stimulus more fluidly.

As an example of this law (A. Hebbian word-association), when first meeting a person you are given their name. The less you see them the weaker the word-association, the more you see them the stronger the word-association. The strength of the association is also a law of the association between idea and stimulus. (B. Hebbian idea-stimulus-association) The more you think or have an idea of the stimulus the stronger the idea is associated with the stimulus. ƒI(S)= Sa (frequency of idea with an stimulus equals strength of association. ƒS(I) = Sa is also true.

We can make experiments that will exhibit how frequency of stimulus with an idea equals the ease of retrieval of the idea upon stimulus. We should be able to prove the greater the frequency the stronger the association.

Neurologically, this proves there is a cellular mechanism that operates according to the former mathematical laws of habit and cognition.

Other equations for cognition:

Similarity = Ip1 = Ip2 (Idea properties that equal idea properties) every positive correspondence is actually the similarity between S(It1) = S(It2)
Difference = Ip1 /=Ip2 (Idea properties that don't equal idea properties).

Consciousness is idea-stimulus similarity.

Stimulus-idea equals properties of thing (SI) = Pn(t)

Survival and Consumption


Tw < E
Total work can not be greater than energy available of system.

N-Self(e) = N+Pre(e)
Decrease in self-entropy caused by a predator eating prey equals increase entropy of the prey, in proportion to the energy needed by the predator.

Surv = Pre(e) < Rep(pre)n
For the self to maintain work/survival, entropy of consumable systems, can not be greater than the reproduction of them.

(H+N)(W +N) > P(e)
As hunger and work increases the probability of outer systems entropy increases.

Increase in reproduction = increase of consumption = increase entropy of consumed.

Bio-quantum-thermodynamics of Emotion & Intention

Negative and Positive emotion and intention exist.


Neg - I won't
Pos - I will
Neg - hate
Pos - love

These are responses to a biological control system of the gene-brain system.

Negative is wave-collapse, positive is wave-propagate.

Negative is increased entropy,  positive is decreased entropy.

There is a biological trend that any thing that causes harm, suffering, displeasing feelings, is negative.
There a is a biological trend that any thing that cause care, health/well-being, pleasing feelings, is positive.

Mathematical possibilities:
Starts as 0 set, (equilibrium/neutrality) and than can exist in a negative or positive intensity.

The following maintains that choice is brought into existence by:

1. Fluctuations in quantum-thermodynamic brain-body-world activity.

2. A biological trend to accept positive outcomes over negative. This can be brought on by scrutiny (evaluation) of ends. E1, E2, E3,... are likely to happen according to the intensity of positivity associated with  the ends. One can either do positive or negative things (choosing outcomes).

You decide to do the negative, or you decide to do the positive. Either way, when you don't do the positive, its because of mental entropy of it, and when you do the negative it is because of decrease entropy of it. All is controlled by fluctuations AND reasons. A reason is why something is done. To obtain positivity one must act for beneficial ends. To obtain negativity one must act to hurt themselves. Reason causes fluctuations. The I only can control the self within in the thermodynamic systems of mind-body-world, but with changing states by reason, or automatically without evaluation of ends at a conscious level.

3. Averse-conditioning and pleasure-conditioning which come from repetition of emotional association with the wave-function (activity).

Annoyance -1 Anger -3 Threat, -5 Rage -7, Violence -9....
Appreciation +2, Acceptance +3, Physical contact +5.....

There can be a mixed ratio, with a mixed signal or mixed idea valence. This causes cognitive dissonance, until both states are dismissed/negated (-), or one is chosen over the other having a 1/2 probability in dissonance. In instances of psychological events, the consequence can be harmful and pleasing, or pleasing and harmful. Ex: Things that are require work can be displeasing, but have rewarding ends.

The intentions or feelings can both be felt in temporal order, making them a sequential event. As in, acting (t1) and not acting (t2).

Self-control is a quantum-thermal fluctuation, that is biased towards the positive, since genes have evolved to respond to stimuli with a positive, or life-benefiting response.

 ΔQ = ΔU - ΔW

Change in heat content, equals change in input of energy, minus the work.

  ΔE = Δ F - W

Change in entropy equals change in feeling minus work down.

(F±n) - W= E

The more negative a or positive a feeling minus the work done because of it equals entropy.

(PE +n) = (n+W)

Increased physical entropy, equals increased work.

(Pe+n) + (-F+n) = n+E, and  Δ Pe + Δ F = Δ E

Increased physical entropy, plus intensity of negative feeling equals increase in entropy.

Lewin's equation for behavior is b = f(Environment,Person) where as my equation for behavior is intensity of emotion plus or minus the physical work done.

(F1+n)I>(F2 - n)I = n+(B) F1

If positive feeling is greater than negative, times intention, than behavior of intention F1 has a gerater chance of occurring. This is an mathematical understanding that people make choices based on how positive the Intention/End/Behavior is.

N±E = n±c/p

Greater or lesser entropy equals greater probability of collapse or propagation.

All emotion has a target or an intention.

F1+n - W = (N+C)/p

The greater the negative feeling minus total work equals the probability of collapse.


The greater the feeling attached to the thing the more likely the greater feeling is be felt.

Positive reason/Negative reason = Probability of C/P.

Positive reason = Positive emotion = Care, pleasure, health.
Negative reason = Negative emotion, Harm, displeasure, sickness.

The ratio equals the probability of collapse or sickness.

Example: A hungry tiger, uninhibited by conditioning, will be likely to increase entropy of outside system so as to reach equilibrium or hunger-satisfaction.

(P-E)/(W-n/n+E)/C-Epre) = Te

That which is doing the satisfying is that which will undergo entropy, because it is being harmed, and there will be increased entropy because of work, and entropy will decrease because of the energy consumed (c) by the predator, which equals total entropy of the interaction.