F’in’g explains, among other properties of human nature, the discontinuity of ethics and its intersubjectivity.

Since posts about F’in’g are fairly complex and condensed, let me ease the situation with an example of ethics and morality.

Ethics is a function of frequency, energy, momentum (ν), and spacetime (st). What is ethical on the gene level is not ethical on the level of a cell or human being. What is ethical for humanity (ν= 7 billion) in the next 10 years is not ethical for humanity on a scale of 100.000 years.

Ethics resides in the quantum world of memes.

Morality (in contrast to ethics) resides in the domain of Newtonian analog physics.

Ethics as quantum memetics is like an electron that is being measured. According to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the more we know a quantum particle’s momentum (ν) less we know its position (st). For its quantum-like property of ethics, we do not know precisely what ethics is until it collapses in space and time. But then it becomes morality. Ethics is uncertain until we measure it; until it collapses to morality.

We cannot establish both ethics functions simultaneously: better that we establish (ν) less we know about (st); and vice versa. Ethics is in a domain of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that is valid for extremely small or extremely large entities. Morality is a measured set of values that safely resides in the realm of human size (ν) and human size (st).

Buddhism for instance is ethics and not morality. It cannot be explained in Newtonian (continual) terms. Buddhism resides in the realm of the phase transition between universes. It can be »explained« as a story from the standpoint of entanglement in physics. Entanglement in spacetime is, in fact, scientifically explained reincarnation.

The same logic stands behind any religion. Religion belongs to ethics until it collapses into institutionalized practice; when it becomes morality. The morality of religions that are not institutionalized, like Buddhism, emerges from ethics only on the individual level in the particular constellation of F’in’g. The collective morality of Buddhists emerges bottom-up from individual memetic fields, while the collective morality of institutionalized religions pretends to offer a top-down solution for individuals, not considering that collective memetic fields can only form bottom-up.

Ethics cannot be communicated. All sacred traditions either claim that the sacred word cannot be communicated or that it can only be communicated by exchanging syllables between two people. Sacred words cannot be communicated or can exist in intersubjectivity only. When uttered, sacred words collapse into practical morality. Practical morality can only pretend to represent ethics from which it emerged; namely, as we know from the emergence theory, Emergent properties are irreducible to and unpredictable from the lower-level phenomena from which they emerge (Clayton 2006, 2).

Reference:

Clayton P., The Re-Emergence of Emergence: The Emergentist Hypothesis from Science to Religion, Oxford University Press, 2006