The first rule of the metacrisis is that you do not talk about the obvious.
The second rule of the metacrisis is that you do NOT talk about the obvious.
The third rule of the metacrisis is that you NEVER talk about the obvious.
The fourth rule of the metacrisis is that this way you can collectively ignore the obvious.
The first rule of an epic maximist is to break all the rules of the metacrisis.
If you'd like to see poetic justice in practice in a kind and badass way this is the ism for you. An ism that requires no great leaders (communism red/dollar green/charcoal gray/oil brown/...) but stems from grassroots in every nation and every continent. It will bring down the power of the dictators like Putin, predators like Epstein & Maxwell & Nygard, and "democratic broligarch billionaires" like Musk & Trump. It will make oil execs show us their personal carbon footprint that they devised to immobilize us by guilt. But the best part is that you dont have to convince a single of the forementioned, but only the "good guys".
It also gives your loved ones a chance of a future way better than past.
The tool at works is honesty in a imperfect human form. And the tool is simply used to test the good guys and also learn a bit about the system we're living in. If you're certain that future for you and everything you love looks less than perfect this is for you.
Right now we're all complicit in the worst crime imaginable. We're worse than nazis like Adolf Eichmann. And that is easy to fix if this paragraph didn't scare you.
Which one gives the burning planet and humanity a better chance for a decent future?
All eight billion of us or none of us ...
This experiment above is a test of understanding for the highest level of moral reasoning as per old geezer called Kohlberg. The formulations you might be familiar are the veil of ignorance (Rawls), the categorical imperative (Kant) or the golden rule from the Bible.
If everyone could live up to this we'd take care of each other and the planet. But this is purely a thought experiment, nobody can live like this. Right? Purely hypotethical principles, right?
Here is a quick test on the maxims of a few informed friends. In Finnish, 1st maxim plant/animal based food. 2nd public transportation or private. 3rd intoxicants. 4th buying unnecessary junk. 5th living like a normal human or living like a millionaire. 6th flying to vacation. So yes, we know what is right. Now we just need to align the norm with the normal and against the excessiveness.
This is the stuff politicians and leaders bring out in their celebratory speeches but forget as soon as the limelight is turned off. Which brings us to part two.
Planetary is a substitute for universal as it implies that we're stuck on earth with the nazis with no allies coming to resque us from the overconsumption we're unable to stop. A finite planet with a planetary problem that requires a planetary approach.
Epic means radical, huge and awesome in terms of ethics. Shit with a level of poetic justice. Something that none of the current movements towards a better world cannot offer.
Praxis means practical as in actionable. Philosophers since the dawn of times have created fancy ideas that never actually come to life. Sociology depends on programming or more like brainwashing to get people doing something barely differently in statistical terms.
So basically this is the former principle version put into effect. Easy for anyone with moral standards and a free will? Well nope, but why should it be? If you passed the previous test and believe that you might have the free will part, check part 3. Otherwise bugger off, kthxbye.
There are two kinds of people. The ones who are telling ...
Kohlberg thought that only 10-15% of people ever reach the sixth stage. But we need perhaps 1 % and the seventh stage, Kohlberg never dared to dream of, is easier than the sixth.
In part 1 we made our maxim test and passed. That is the theoretical part we need for testing pretty much every decision. How well would we be should all 8 billion of us do this. Easy peasy and uncle Bob Paulson. The interesting part comes when you start trying this in the real world and seeing how tough doing the right thing has been made. That is the pull of the normal. The superorganism? Addiction? Or the systemic level that has us fucking up the planet in herds.
Diagnosis and a prescription. Digestion problems. Then its fine. But if you're saying that you're deviating from the norm because of ethical reasons you're getting immediate flak. This is something you do NOT talk about. Everyone with half a brain knows the obvious rules from part one but keep on living like they don't exist let along talk about those. But for most of us living a moral life is either extremely hard or impossible. And to our decision makers and leaders even more so. That's why we cannot talk about this. And exactly why we should and must.
The power of the systemic level is almost incomprehensible. If we're struggling with addiction to overconsumption shouldn't this be easy withdrawal compared to real addiction like heroin? As it happens the US of A has made some experiments and stats with the subject. Showing us that you can cure 99 percent from 500 000 heroin addicts only by fixing the systemic level. The experiment was called Vietnam War.
Over 2,5 million soldiers served in the Republic of Vietnam during the war. A third of those used heroin and 20 percent were addicited. The nation was prepared for an emergency when half a million combat veterans addicted to heroin would return back home. Heroin is considered a nearly impossible habit to kick with 90 % nearing relapse rates. Only 1 percent got readdicted when they returned back to a healthy society.
Perhaps that gives us an idea that nothing is impossible if we fix the society, to be healthy, instead of the dopamine and envy filled dystopian hellscape we're living in 2024.
And so the post-totalitarian system behaved in a characteristic way: it defended the integrity of the world of appearances in order to defend itself. For the crust presented by the life of lies is made of strange stuff. As long as it seals off hermetically the entire society, it appears to be made of stone. But the moment someone breaks through in one place, when one person cries out, "The emperor is naked!"—when a single person breaks the rules of the game, thus exposing it as a game—everything suddenly appears in another light and the whole crust seems then to be made of a tissue on the point of tearing and disintegrating uncontrollably.”
- Václav Havel, The Power of the Powerless
Maxims are the test of truth during the times when anything can be made moral by money and power.
Check Timeline of Epic Praxis to see this dumbass awkwardly trying to check the good guys comprehension of universal ethics.
