Open    Access



Measuring Morals, Scientifically



Author(s)

Bob Johnson

Full-Text PDF XML     67 Views

DOI:10.17265/2159-5313/2026.03.011

Greater Manchester University, Bolton, UK

WARS ARE AMORAL—THEY RISK FORECLOSING US ALL. Radioactivity is no respecter of opinions, however weighty. So why do our world’s thinkers sit on their hands, voicelessly observing our species, as it self-fossilises? Their most obvious objection is that you can never really know what is actually going on in other peoples’ minds. Introspection is taboo—even though it’s something we each do, every morning. To this impasse, this paper responds by exploring a scientific instrument which proves objectively, for all to see, just what does go on in the mind of a warmonger. And unhappily, until we can all agree on what does motivate such carnage, our chances of surviving it, globally, shrink by the decade, if not by the year.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the ideas explored in this paper are not especially novel—in fact, apart from the smart phone itself, the three pivotal points discussed here, have been circulating for 30, 40, and 130 years, already. The question the paper poses is—can we coordinate them all, soon enough, to avert our forthcoming, meticulously planned, and hideously costly, Nucleargeddon? Is this our species-suicidal-flaw? This paper offers material, concrete, scientific data to cure this omertá, whatever your philosophy, religion or politics might aver to the contrary.

Strictly speaking, these devices do not show what the other person’s mind is actually thinking, rather what he or she is unable to bring to mind, to think through, at the time. But this scarcely diminishes the inestimable value of a device which gives us all, an objective, measurable and consistent account of our thought processes themselves.

In a word, what this scientific instrument does show, beyond dispute, is—thought-block. And for a species whose one evolutionary advantage is to think things through, and thereby plan ahead—blocked-thinking imperils our healthy future—as we see it doing, all around us, today. And the one and only place in which we can do any planning ahead, is in our quite remarkable frontal lobes. In sum, what this $200 device does, is to demonstrate, scientifically, for all to see, whether our vital frontals are fully functioning, or not.

On the bright side—we plan ahead for our next meal, our next sleep, our schooling, our careers, even for our old age. Our creativity and our artistic endeavours know no limits. We could do none of these, with any chance of success, unless we could think ahead, think things through, using our astonishing lobes. There can be no argument about this—we all do it—so much so, that trade, commerce, and indeed community life in general, simply could not prosper without intact frontals. That’s what we use them for. So an inexpensive device which can show everyone else, whether they are working healthily, or not, is invaluable.

On the dark side—it must by now be obvious that we humans are fully capable of the most horrendous mismanagement of our affairs. So much so, that one can almost guarantee that, however well it appears to be going at first—“it will all end in tears”, as my semi-confident mother used to lament.

Isn’t it time we applied some of our much-vaunted logic to this grotesquerie? Time we admitted—firstly that that’s what we humans are prone to do, secondly that we need urgently to work out where this unlimited appetite for destructivity does actually come from, and third and finally, how to fix it, 100%. These are the three themes of the paper itself. To put it bluntly, if we can fly ourselves to the moon, isn’t it high time we found out, for certain, why we can’t stop bombing each other to smithereens?

This paper would be stronger if it could be supplied with just such a device to go along with it, so that sceptical readers could see for themselves just how radical is the re-appraisal it does provide of war, violence and a host of other mental aberrations, scientifically. Such devices are readily available from any standard retail outlet, and are cheap enough to empower anyone who can afford a smart phone. Placed in the hands of the general public, a more humane outlook will prevail. I have in mind today’s over-dominant psychiatric text, whose claim to be scientific is utterly demolished by this inexpensive device, at a stroke. Such a healthier outcome would be welcomed by any who are currently suffering from our current grossly unscientific psychiatric mismanagement, and that includes staff.

The paper has seven sections—(1) Lenny is blocked. (2) Lenny succeeds in unblocking himself, eight weeks later. (3) “And I love you too”, “says” Ethan, aged only 24 minutes old. (4) Craving Consistency. (5) Earning Reliability. (6) Blossoming via Affirmation. (7) Conclusion.

In sum, the three themes of this paper are—firstly, Alice Miller’s poisonous pedagogy writ large (i.e. her “Schwarze Pädagogik”). Secondly, validating this scientifically. And third and finally, curing it, 100%.

Please note: The paper draws heavily on two videos, both readily available on the web. Searching for “My pivotal case” and “Ethan’s first half hour” would readily produce them. A verbatim transcript of the first, is in the appendix.

frontal lobes, thought-block, child-terrors, civilisations-six-blindspots, psychopathy, psychosis, crime, scams, bullies, war, Ethan’s first half hour, frontal-meter

Bob Johnson. (2026). Measuring Morals, Scientifically. Philosophy Study, May-June 2026, Vol. 16, No. 3, 345-365.