The Transcendental Shotgun

The Transcendental Shotgun

by Ben Orioli

Is it wrong to commit murder in this world? Even though it happens on a massive scale daily, murder is considered immoral. This would only have context in a moral society; murder in a moral society can be justified. There is no free thought and your freedoms are limited, if someone is to break the mold they are labeled as “Immoral” and are often not respected or understood in the common social structure. They are often outcast from society and shown further that they are incorrect in their ideals. Unless they are murdering for morality, which in all cases (such as war) makes murder okay. The current system of humanity based on the skewed righteousness of some and the willingness of others to be led like sheep.

You are conditioned from the moment you are born to understand that you cannot make a change in this world. In school you are taught that you need to follow your leaders and accept their word as divine truth. You are taught of the social pecking order and your inability to do anything about it. As you grow you turn into the same faceless clay mold as everyone else. All set to the tune of morality, which teaches you to give all of yourself and expect nothing in return.

Consider how little freedom you currently have in this society, what defines you as a person. Freedom to choose whether you want a Coke or Pepsi, a Snickers or a Milky way candy-bar? Is that really freedom? What if you wanted Snickers to make a candy-bar with vanilla instead of chocolate? Is it really freedom if you cannot choose what you get? In our current society you are defined by what other people choose for you. You have little to no freedom as a person and you are forced to obey a set of ethics that create a fictional perception of reality.

Do you think, without morals, would this world remain the same? Would there be murder, rape or a need for a government? I’ve wondered for a long time, how an amoral society would work. Imagine for a moment, if you will, a society in which people had no morals but respected each other. People who would have empathy for others, not out of pity, but out of understanding.

There would be no racism and no religion. No reasons to commit rape or murder. Everyone would act entirely on their own amoral accord. In this society people would work to aid their fellow man, instead of themselves. You would be allowed to adopt your own set of beliefs, no one would judge your opinions or consider them wrong or right. All people would be individuals.

The big question is though, would it work? Is there something in humans that prevents most of us from having the mental capacity to be a true individual rather than the meek and obedient? It may very well be that humans need a select few in power to be able to manage the masses; people who could make good choices for the better of humanity, without the shoddy basis of morality.

Unfortunately, with this basis of morality, our current system will never function correctly. Only the wicked are rewarded under our reality’s illusionary guise. Only by rare circumstance will this society get a great leader and even then they are restricted by our self-induced inhibitions.

I suppose, in retrospect, neither system works. I cannot help but wonder though, if it’d make a difference. I’d like to hope it would. It would please me to know that humanity isn’t so hopeless, but perhaps humanity is simply a lost cause.