The burden of morals

Any conscious behaviour takes more energy than unconscious behaviour. I have seen many people, who worried less about morals, do very well. They save energy and reach higher levels (Whatever higher level means).

That is not bad at all. It is how we define ourselves i think. We can be happy with whatever we are or even better find reasons to justify whatever we are.

I have come to a conclusion that morals and its friends are important only when our decisions affect lot of people: such as in politics. Otherwise we are fine, I think.

Or some have the advantage of being what they think is right. There is no burden. Others have to struggle to be their ideal self.

Regards
~rAGU

Altruism and Socialism

Even during ancient times selfishness was considered the drive for all transactions. For love, hate, business and you name it, almost for everything. Allow me to quote an over used verse from Bruhadaranyaka Upanishath;

Idam brahma, idam kshatram, ime lokah, ime devah, imani bhutani, idam sarvam yad ayam atma.

"This Source of knowledge; this source of power; all these worlds; all these gods; all these beings; -- All this is just the Self."

Another one from Yajnyavalkya again; (A sage who lived somewhere around 900 BCE in India)

na va are patyuh kamaya patih priyo bhavati, atmanas-tu kamaya patih priyo bhavati; na va are jayayai kamaya jaya priya bhavati,......,na va are bhutanam kamaya bhutani priyani bhavanti, atmanas-tu kamaya bhutani priyani bhavanti; na va are sarvasya kamaya sarvam priyam bhavati, atmanas-tu kamaya sarvam priyam bhavati;

"Everything becomes intimate for the sake of self".

This leaves no scope for altruism! How are we to explain altruism if we are to believe the above argument? Note that evolutionary Biology agrees with the above argument. This is not just some "Vedic Crap".

Interestingly I found an answer to this question in a psychology text book. It says that altruism is a profitable business! Profitable to the gene pool (Gene: segment of DNA responsible for a trait). Sociobiologists have controversially extended this to social transactions as well.

I feel there is quite an amount of altruism in socialism, thus making it a relevant philosophy. In the wake of these arguments I find capitalism self destructive. In what appears to be selfish endeavour I find a stupidity that ruins its chance of survival.

I find an idea that is neither purely capitalistic nor purely socialistic, interesting. Altruistic capitalism: a capitalism where there is place for selfless business. Some have called it capitalism with human face. But we have a scientific support for such a thing. It is not artificial anymore, I think. It has a high chance of surviving in the natural dynamics of business.

What do you think?