Moral Values & Instinctive Drives:
We are born with a set of instinctive drives which are inherent in our psychobiological structure. We don’t have to go anywhere in order to learn about them. On the other hand we are not born with any set of moral values in our psychobiological structure, hence they are not inherent and we need to teach them anew to every new child born.
Is there any relationship between the two?
Certainly yes! But before investigating into this relationship, we need to ask another more important question.
Why did humanity need creating moral values at all if they were not naturally built in our psychobiological structure?
It was so because pure instinctive drives scared humans and became a threat when they set on their task of creating a new social order in the distant past.
Which social order were they scheming to establish?
It was a plutocratic (the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy) male dominated social system that they were plotting to uphold. They would simply do so since they were the ones who were wealthy and could bribe others to buy their opinion.
Wealth in the form of private property had very recently made its entry in the human life and the ones who were either strong or cunning or else both together were able to amass it more than the rest.
And why were these initiators predominantly males?
It was so because males were stronger (if not more cunning!) than females and also they had more time at their behest to accumulate more of wealth simply because females lost it in delivering and rearing up their kids.
The kids were theirs and not of males since no one of them (including females) knew whose these kids were. And when they grew, they would support their mothers in the pursuit of amassing wealth that they missed while delivering and rearing them up.
So males made it a point to know whose these kids individually were. It was only possible if females agreed to stop following their instinctive drive to have sex with a male of their choice either every time or else after some time new.
Why would they agree?
Males designed a new faculty of thought which would uphold newly envisioned moral values as essentially opposed to instinctive drives. They were supported by so-called supernatural practitioners who enjoyed a high status among ignorantly naive human dwellings.
The very first of the newly established moral values declared sex as the basic sin which should be avoided as much as possible. But since it wasn’t feasible practically, the rule was framed that one female should never have sex with multiple males. If she did, she would be severely punished by another newly created entity by the supernatural practitioners, named God.
A Cunning Conspiracy:
In order for this rule to look unbiased between genders, it was framed as such for both of them. But as a cunning conspiracy it was never implemented for males as strictly as it was done for females.
The telltale marks of a stealthy sex also went against females who sooner or later conceived children out of sex whereas males could easily get out without any telltale marks after any such interaction with females.
Marriage Comes Into Existence:
To put an official stamp on this rule, a new social institution named marriage was designed that limited the choice of sex partners to one for lifelong as against many any day.
Now a new moral science was envisaged comprising a set of moral values that humans should follow even if against the calls of their instinctive drives.
All the moral values that were implemented went against natural instinctive drives in one way or the other.
Here is a partial list:
It branded marriage as a one male and one female in sexual relationship all through their life although males frequently married more than one female too. But the female was strictly not allowed to do that.
It made it a sin not to be loyal to one single sex partner in the institution of marriage all through one’s life. Every female (at times more than one and at others many of them) was/were assigned to one single man to have sex with and produce children who would carry the name of the male and not the female who gave birth to them.
Speaking the Truth:
Our instinctive drives never felt a need to tell a lie but we would also never say we were speaking the truth. We would simply say we were speaking. We simply didn’t need to know the two concepts since we always only spoke what we saw and what we did.
But as the new social system establishing monogamy and plutocracy realized it was suppressing the instinctive drives, people WOULD tend to satiate them stealthily and say they did not.
So, a new concept of truth was envisaged as opposite to a more basic concept of a lie. If a lie didn’t exist in our action and in our mind, there was no need for a concept of truth to exist as well. But lies entered the domain of human action owing to the establishment of a cunningly unjustified society.
Hence truth was designed as a moral value to stop people from lying which they innocently did to satiate their instinctive drives and hide it from those in authority.
That’s why speaking the truth should be brought down from its high pedestal of respect and reverence that our moral values are assigning to it.
Like the truth and a lie, there was nothing like dishonesty in our instinctive drives that we needed to act on.
But the newly established unjustified social system feared people could plot secret schemes to rebel against the suppression that they might have to undergo; it termed any such possibility as dishonesty and coined a desirable behavior named honesty as its antithesis.
It is very interesting to note that the more basic anti-moral values were named as sounding the antithesis of the so-called moral values which actually were conceived as antitheses of the so-called anti-moral values.
Sense of Duty:
Again while we lived with our instinctive drives guiding our actions and behavior, we never needed any concept like a sense of duty in our mindset. We would simply act what our spontaneous feeling would guide us to do.
And such a spontaneous feeling was always of concern and sympathy for one another, so we never needed to have a sense of duty in order to act the most desirable way.
But with the suppression of our instinctive drives, we wouldn’t feel such concern and sympathy for those who suppressed them.
As its anti-thesis the sense of duty was formulated as one of the moral values that were supposed to be upheld in any circumstances, otherwise the guilt of the sin that we committed would not let us live without a feeling of guilt in our mind.
Where Do We Arrive:
We can go on and on and on with each one of these moral values showing them to be an antithesis of either a suppression of our instinctive drives or else as an antithesis of our reaction to that suppression, but the limited space stops us from discussing it in full right now here.
We will be covering them all in our posts in this category of Value System. We will also discuss the effect of the two of them, instinctive drives and moral values, living in one single mind and corrupting the same to the extent of turning it habitually stressed in general and seriously ill in particular.
Get more stuff like this
Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.
Thank you for subscribing.
Something went wrong.