Your Conscience is a Lie You Inherited

What does it mean to have virtue? There's the general public's belief in the idea of good and evil, where characteristics, behaviours, and actions can be classified along this two-sided scale. Some notable determinants of these weights being charity, sexual purity, selflessness, honesty on the "good" end, while traits on the "evil" side are murder, selfishness, and deceit. Of course these don't account for all the variables this scale is based on, but are some key parts of it that provide a well-rounded picture of it. The problem with this measuring tool is that how is all of this defined in the first place? What makes something good and evil intrinsically?

And when you delve a little deeper, aren't the characteristics of this scales based on simply the impoverished finding ways to amass wealth from the rich, who are sexually impure, selfish by not helping the poor while also deceiving them? Meaning this scale isn't some grandiose absolute moral law, but instead it's merely the byproduct of unfulfilled human needs that over time have formed what is modern day morality?

However, this genealogical argument, famously presented by Friedrich Nietzsche, has a flaw ingrained in its core: does it matter if the scale was invented for some purpose and for the sake of mere convenience? Does that undermine its value, its underlying worth? No, just as how we would not denounce mathematics because it came as some theorise,  from the needs of early merchants to count stocks and debts - self interest motives -  we would not deny it here. So now the question that stands is whether this absolute nature truly is part of something beyond escaping poverty, whether there's something within us that drives "good and evil".

Dostoevsky would think so, who is implied to believe in the notion of an innate human conscience, as observed when criminals, who may even be intelligent, self-aware and philosophers themselves rationalise murder logically, while still suffering from immense psychological breakdowns, this chronic, primal suffering preventing them from merely living after doing their misdeed. This brings into the question of morality the idea of guilt. Don't we humans, at a fundamental level, enjoy helping others? And more importantly, don't we suffer when making or even perceiving others suffering? The guilt builds and burdens us,  alluding to the idea that all humans including me and you care about each other's feelings at a deep, instinctual level, suggesting we all have this absolute moral scale already embedded into our very brains and nerves. How can we escape a thing so biologically intimate with us! The scale is absolute because it is biologically and therefore at heart tied to our very consciousness and being. 

There's another variable yet to be considered however. Or more precisely, an assumption we made. Not that some individuals are from birth in possession of some psychological illness, or that Dostoevsky's portrayal of guilt is largely exaggerated (these are valid critiques though). What I'm getting at  here is the question of what does being virtuous even mean? Is feeling good really enough for something to be considered virtuous?

Virtue is this idea of right and wrong, but why does this all matter? How is it different to simply pleasure? The answer is meaning. But what does it mean to have meaning then? Aren't virtue and meaning one and of the same? I'd argue yes, we are going to assume meaning and virtue are bounded to each other, where acting to one's virtues directly creates meaning. Because aren't our scales all defined by what is good and bad based on what is deemed worthy, important within our lives? Our so-called meaning; which if we verbalise is directly equivalent to our right and wrong isn't it? If you disdain selfishness you must find meaning or more specifically, a higher purpose and sensation in not being selfish.

Aha but we wouldn't call hedonism virtuous now would you? But why? Aren't we regressing back to our initial scale of the poor/rich morality? To that I say no! Is there anything truly wrong with basking in sensual pleasure, and with that what we're arriving to is individual feeling. The idea that all people feel guilt is flawed because it assumes all people psychologically are the same! Ah this conclusion is obvious you say? I do not mean it in the sense that certain people have mental disorders like sociopathy, but in the sense that peoples' very psychologies differ. Although all of us feel what Dostoevsky describes: this scale's produced guilt, the magnitude of the guilt differs based on the value, which in turn depends on the individual! Certain people are very sensitive to the opinions of others, which shakes their very foundation emotionally: their very cornerstone is made out of flesh and blood! Some are fairly apathetic, not because they lack feeling but because they can suppress it, meaning they are making a judgement in what feelings are superior to others, or alternatively, just feel an ounce of what others feel. Most of us sit somewhere on the middle of this spectrum, defined by these endpoints. Of course, more extreme cases exist especially after accounting for mental illnesses, but the idea that this applies to all of us is what I'm getting at. Not only the mentally sick!

Why should the fact that guilt differs in magnitude even hold any weight? The deaf man doesn't disapprove of sound's value does he? The scale is still absolute hah. But that assumption is built on him caring about the actual value of sound: his dearly treasured kin and friends, don't they all cherish these silent voices? Isn't sound a mechanism by which people can communicate and learn? He cares because the sound links to his own values and drives! The idea of sound itself holds intellectual, social weight here but what if this weight were light? These drives stripped bare, and with these other feelings to roam like any other, wouldn't he prioritise these other goals of his and values over this single element of morality? If a part of morality crumbles like this, wouldn't other parts crumble similarly as well?


When it comes to the individual psyche, some people can  be a damned circus jester for their entire lives and find it meaningful. Some can indulge in pleasure day and night and still wake up with a grin beaming with fulfilment. Some can party for days with the occasional dose of an instagram quote for their annual "meaning" intake. Others always have some urge, a natural, deeply-rooted craving to find this compass of theirs and ensure all of existence pivots to its divine needle. Its all meaning! Meaning is what makes us live rationally, what makes us go 'ah this is why I should live', my ultimate 'logic', Its the axiom! These beliefs that serve as the ground to us all within the webs of our perspective, ever-changing, being a drunk who doesn't know where its steering, moving toward one great road to another: its all meaning! And our thoughts are thus all built in relation to these ever-so shifting axioms, based of the feelings excavated from the experiences we've had! I suppose then that this driver is speeding to whatever catches his fancy in the moment. What an idiot!


The irony of all of this is that then how do we actually figure out who's mentally ill and who's not? There's no such answer! Aren't we all lunatics from the view of one who's deemed psychologically unwell?

Thus my friend! We've ventured on an interesting journey, and this heavy smog is now clearing. Some feathers might have been ruffled but I'd like to tell you that the end is near! This all converges to this ultimate conclusion: the core of all meaning and by extension virtue, is individual psychology, feelings and thoughts, which are determined by genetics and experience.

Pre-determinism is a natural outcome here and yes that's true, but so what if its pre-determined if the very illusion of it doesn't feel as such, and feels conscious, feels meaningful? This meaning I'm referring to is all a byproduct of one's thoughts and feelings, where both are poured into the same cup, stirred, where judgements and scales form, producing what we name meaning. This physical sensation! This distinct clarity! This sense of self! Its meaning!


Do you wish to become a monk, the next buddha? Your meaning comes from the feelings and thoughts creating some judgement here that it deems as such! Are you some grave demon? Who drools over the thought of disheveled corpses and morbid calamity? Your sentiments and thoughts have crafted the blade called meaning! It's all the same. The angels and devils of the world, they only differ in what their ancestors and experiences have argued about in the end don't they?

Therefore, Virtue, I argue, is the scale produced by the interaction and consequent judgements between our feelings and thoughts, which are determined by experience and genes. Hence, hence! My friend! We all have our different meanings don't we and paths don't we? Whether you live as some humble, god-loving priest, or an unrestrained, blasphemous tyrant, to live true to oneself, your own scale, is where the curtain falls, the play unravels, and where we can all dance unmasked in radiant grins! Where this heavenly sensation usurps our very being!

Ah, what have you done? Now the fog is gone. Its misty light, my light, you've slaughtered it, plundered it from me, vanquished it! You Demon! Blasphemer! Murderer!