Introduction

In the discussion about the metaphysics of Quality, inspired to Pirsig's books, we saw that reality can be depicted using a hierarchy of static patterns and that, using this subdivision, the human social rules can be described in terms of human nature through the concept of epiphenomenon.
In the book "Lila" Pirsig defines the intellectual moral values as the patterns created by the human social groups, as if these values were the product of an epiphenomenon which relies on the elementary human social groups. In our opinion this thesis is very interesting, partly valid, but not completely consistent with the model of static patterns and their hierarchy levels. Pirsig defines the threshold between one scheme and the next one when the new scheme, of higher order, is obtained using as "building blocks" the static patterns of the lower level. Molecules are patterns formed using atomic patterns, the cells patterns are made using as basic elements like molecular patterns, and so on.
In our opinion, if we consider the pattern obtained using as "building blocks" the existing human social groups, we could get a macro scheme called "human race", "planet earth" or "collective superego". Such a scheme which will certainly have to do with the intellectual moral values, but does not seem to coincide with the intellectual moral values.
In this debate we try to complete the metaphysics of Quality using a different approach, based on the dual nature of the human mind, which in our opinion is capable of producing two types of epiphenomena very different: the social pattern and the intellectual pattern.

Self deceiving

In psychology it is well known the capability of human beings to lie to themselves.
Yung spoke of "the inner trash bin," indicating that part of the mind designed to keep the thoughts that we refuse to accept, or that we prefer to hide to ourselves, usually without being aware of this process.
The mechanism of the "self deceiving" operates primarily in two ways: first, it invents reassuring explanations about our behavior or about the behavior of other people, probably in order to maintain high self-esteem, reduce fear and perceive the world in a positive way. This mechanism could be thought as an effect of preservation instinct, a kind of opposing force to the principles of cynicism (which would tend to see everything for what it really is).
Secondly, the mechanism of self deceiving hides aspects of reality that are obvious to outside observers. This is the case of the smoker who says "I can quit whenever I want" or the overprotective mother that limits the freedom of the children saying "I'm acting on their behalf".
All the human beings are slaves of the mechanism of self deception. Claiming to not lie unconsciously or claiming to know ourselves is one of the most dangerous and widespread effects of the mechanism of the self deceiving.
If we were truly free from such a unconscious mechanism we would live in a state of perpetual bliss: we'd always know what we want, we'd always know what worries us, nothing could make us angry and nothing could ever disappoint ourselves.

In fact every disappointment is the child of an illusion: if people disappoint us it is just because in our heads we created (somehow in the past) a different image of the person, through the mechanism of self deceiving. The real person has no fault to be different from what we had in mind. The same applies to corruption, imperfect institutions, crime and religion problems: everytime one of these entities disappoints us it means that we created an illusion of the external reality, and often this happens unconsciously.

Example: let's consider a love relationship ended after a betrayal. The victim, in most cases, will react growing hate against the person who betrayed, so deceived herself (or himself) for not accepting that the pain is actually due to anger towards ourselves. If we choose to love a person potentially unfaithful, and we want to convince us with all our strength that the loved person will be faithful to us, we are responsible for creating this illusion of the loved one (the other person would be guilty only if he knows that we have such an illusion, and he takes advantages from this information). In other words, if the person we loved had sexual intercourse with another person, without our permission, this behavior could probably be part of his nature. There could be no drastic change, nor a revolution in the another person, but just a fulfil of the actual nature, as in the short novel about the scorpion and the frog. The true it's rather that our choice and our ability to value the other person have proved inadequate, because we have built an image of a loved one different from that it proved to be.

This explains how the mechanism of self deceiving is useful and necessary, because it allows humans to overcome failure and disappointments, blaming the others instead that blaming ourselves. Removing this mechanism is very dangerous, because it may lead a person to self-pity, depression and chronic victimization.

Another way to describe this mechanism is saying that human kind is the synthesis of poetry and cynicism: cynicism makes us see things as they really are, developing awareness and so obstructing happiness, while poetry makes us look to the world beautiful and idealized by departing from reality to experience moments of true joy. The concept has already been expressed in many different ways: it's not possible to be aware and happy in the same time (popular saying), I wish you to see everything for what it really is (chinese curse), the mind lies in the name of happiness (my personal aphorism).

The two morals

The human brain is governed by the same laws that govern the animal brain. To many emotions correspond the contraction or relaxation of facial muscles, activation of certain glands, altering the concentration of some enzyme, hormone or particular molecule, such as adrenaline. We are characterized by instincts, fears, states of wonder, love and hate, just like other mammals. Notice that we are talking about sensations, as psychological and biological phenomena, and not about feelings, which usually are discussed philosophically, psychologically or spiritually.

Let's consider the Pirsig's model and let's imagine an organic static pattern called "animal-man", i.e. an anthropomorphic and unconscious creature, governed only by the laws of the animal world. In other words we'll consider a fictitious animal physically identical to humans, but characterized by a behavior similar to that of a monkey. Our hypothesis is that a group of such organic static patterns would produce an aggregate level, obtained as epiphenomena of the behavior of these fictional creatures, which we will coincide with the static scheme associated with the animal society, which for brevity we will call also the social scheme.


Let's then consider another fictional creature: the organic static pattern "mental-man", i.e a creature very similar to human beings, but completely free from emotions, or at least able to fully control them (and therefore to be always perfectly aware of them).
For example this "mental-man" could have a mechanical body and be equipped with artificial intelligence (Star Trek fans may also think about the Vulcans), or could even be a pure "mental creature", without a physical body, living in a virtual environment such the internet. This organic static scheme will create a social pattern of higher level, produced as an epiphenomenon of the behavior of these individual "thinking beings": we'll call this new level the mental society or briefly the intellectual scheme.

Although completely fictitious, these creatures help us make to expose the next statement:

The intellect of humans can be considered as the combination of two different static schemes: the scheme purely organic (brain) and the scheme purely intellectual (mind). The synthesis of such schemes in the same entity (the human) produces the human creature that we know. These patterns interact each other by influencing each other, but due to the mechanism of self-deception human beings can not be fully aware of this interaction, nor even notice any behavioral differences and/or aptitude between the two schemes.
This duality generates two patterns of higher level distinct each another, and regulated by different laws because derived from different epiphenomena. These two schemes of higher level may be thought as the animal society (the moral values) and the mental society (the intellectual values).
Since the human being is a synthesis of mind and brain, also the resulting human society will be the synthesis of the animal society and the intellectual society.

The values of the animal society will be epiphenomena produced by the behavior of humans beings as animals. Thus we have the pack instinct, the need to socialize, the need to uniform ourselves to others, the behavior of the crowd, fear, derision of different people, taboo, traditions, fashions, customs and costumes.
These values can be thought of, briefly, as the culture or the animal moral of the society.

On the opposite, the values of the mental society are the epiphenomena obtained from the behavior of humans beings when considered as pure mind creatures, neglecting their animal instincts (due to the action of mechanism of self-deception) and simultaneously pushed by the ideals that they are able to invent. Thus we have laws, bureaucracy, science, language, political ideologies, philosophy, public morals and religious precepts.
These values can be thought, briefly, as the ideals or the intellectual moral of society.

Splitting the moral of the society in two categories does not mean that these two moralities are separated or complementary, but the opposite: most animal values and intellectual values will coincide, as in the case of adultery, which is condemned either by the animal moral (as an epiphenomenon of fear and envy), either by the intellectual moral (as an epiphenomenon of the ideal concept of loyalty). But there are many cases when the two moralities differ, and this conflict originated most of the contradictions in human society.
To better explain the concept in the following paragraphs we'll provide some examples, trying to identify and describe all the organic static patterns involved in the production of the specific social epiphenomena.

The human schema

When we say that the static pattern "human society" is made up of two other schemes we do not mean that it's possible to separate the two patterns and study them as independent entities. An example could be thinking about the water, which it's made up of hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms. Saying that the water is the union of hydrogen and oxygen easy the understanding of many properties, provides a good functional model and allows us to explain almost entirely the behavior of the water molecule. It is not possible to study a water-like liquid where hydrogen and oxygen are separated and distinct, because if that happens, the object of our study is no longer water.
Similarly, we can not imagine a human society where it is possible to identify social groups purely "animals" or purely "intellectual", because if that happens, we will not longer being observing actual human beings. Hence human society will always be the combination of the two schemes, because every person is always the union of a intellectual pattern and a biological pattern, as each water molecule is the combinations of different atoms.

The main difficulty when trying to distinguish the mental pattern from the biological schemes is the constant interaction between the two schemes. The biological pattern influences our way of thinking, and therefore our intellectual values, as well as the intellectual pattern is capable of arousing emotions and biological reactions.
Example: many people justify the need for fencing their homes, locking the car and keeping away strangers speaking about under laws, ideals or principles, sometimes without realizing that these intellectual values are simply the rationalization of the animal instinct to mark and defend the territory.
The opposite example, i.e. the influence of the mind pattern over the biological pattern, typically occurs during sporting events. Who does not know the game context will not prove any particular emotion, but will see the event for what it "really" is: a bunch of people trying to make ridiculous and meaningless gestures. On the opposite, those aware of the game context, the rules of the sport, the situation in the league, the history of teams and players will react swearing, shouting, getting angry and exulting with joy, feeling actual genuine emotions.

Whatever is the cause of a biological or mental pattern, once it's acquired, it becomes independent from the original cause. Therefore, once we have rationalized an emotion and produced the equivalent intellectual pattern, the new intellectual pattern will be indistinguishable from other intellectual patterns (which are generally generated by "pure" reasoning, or created from other existing patterns using the abstract intelligence).
In the same way, once we translated a mental situation into an emotional pattern, the feeling that will arise later will be totally and naturally biological, and will be generally indistinguishable from other original "animal patterns".

Theory applications

Materialism and consumism

Using the approach discussed above, the need to exercise ownership on some objects, namely the desire to increase our properties and state that some things belong to us rather than others, is an animal value (or social) manifesting itself as a high Quality aggregate in any social pattern produced by territorial animals.
In other words, human society tends to value wealth and ownership because they are value of the animal society, which in turn is an epiphenomenon of the territorial animal scheme.
This is confirmed by the fact that almost all societies formed by non-territorial individuals, such as Indian or nomads in general, do not encourage as a model of social successful the ownership of objects, but on the opposite, these groups usually develop traditions such as "you must own only the bare essentials." For these individuals having too many objects becomes uncomfortable during the frequent moves, so their social pattern gives little value to the accumulation of material goods.

Inner beauty and outer beauty

By effect of the reproductive instinct, which makes valuable the physically attractive people, the animal society gives high moral value to the outer (i.e. exterior) beauty and the appreciation of clothes. In other words outer beauty is a social value. Instead, through the mechanism of self-deception, when we speak we tend to diminish the appearances, preaching or defending the ideal of the inner beauty, stating that it is more important to be than to look good, that superficial aspects are not important, that it is better to be themselves rather than adapting to other peoples tastes. It follows that inner beauty is an intellectual value.

This is a first example of an apparent contradiction within social patterns. Human society usually preaches the value of the inner beauty in the movies, love stories, books, church, at school and in almost all families.
But such a value is encouraged only when speaking, by the intellectual behavior. The proposed social model states exactly the opposite: famous singers and actors are often good-looking people, at school we are primarily judged by how we dress and behave, parents prefer children that are always tidy and well dressed, and on work it's more important to be socially skilled then to be very productive.

The example shows how in the society can coexist values apparently opposite: the animal moral value rewarding the exterior beauty, and the intellectual moral value rewarding the inner beauty. Who wins of the two? They win both, but everyone acts primarily within its own static pattern. So the actual social success is based on external features, while the intellectual appreciation is based on inner qualities. In other words:

Beautiful people have more success (even if criticized), but good people are more commended (even if ugly)

Recommendation and nepotism

The practice of recommendations in the world of work is an animal value (or social), a consequence of the fear of strangers animal instinct, but also of the protection of offspring instinct. This case represents another example of apparent contradiction in the human society. Human society encourage as a animal moral value the logic of recommendations, while the intellectual society preaches meritocracy as a mental moral value.

In other words: the social configuration "using recommendations" is highly spread through every society (somewhere officially, somewhere unofficially), hence it's a moral value of the animal society. In the same time, due the mechanism of self-deception, many people lie to themselves, claiming to believe in meritocracy while they rely on the recommendation habit. It comes that the social configuration "use meritocracy" is an intellectual value widely spread in the mental society, hence it's a moral value of the intellectual society.

As in the case of the exterior beauty, this example shows that opposing values can coexist on different static schemes in the "human society" level. In fact, with regards the actual social practices and the behaviors, the recommendation is a widespread moral value. In contrast, with regards to the laws, teachings and ideal principles, the use of the recommendations is an immoral practice.

Habits, traditions and culture

The cultural traditions of a people is perhaps the simplest and most straightforward case of animal value (or social). Traditions are transmitted by the human ability to mimic the behavior of the group, learning habits by imitation. The learning process is, basically speaking, a process of unconscious repetition of schemes suggested by the social group. People learn the traditions of the place and time where they lives, and they repeats and transmits those traditions usually without the intervention of the critical intellectual schemes.
The traditions are thus the epiphenomenon of the social pack instinct. These values are defended "because it has always been like that", because "so did my grandparents", "in memory the good times" or "because it is an old habit". The pack recognizes itself in its collective values, and new members of the pack must learn these values or they risk being opposed and dismissed.

Traditions are often the cause of conflict or friction, because they have a very strong animal origin. For this reason they are resistant to the dynamic action of intellectual values. When a new idea tries to spread out, proposing to behave differently from how tradition suggest, the social pattern reacts with the Static Quality force, i.e. with all the extension of the social value (the tradition itself). No matter how good, fair or better it's the innovative proposal: when a tradition is widespread becomes extremely difficult to change it, although the intellectual level agrees on the need to change it.

Heros and martyrs

History shows that people who have pursued an intellectual value, practising a behavior that many other people thought (mentally) it was right, into a society where such a behavior was not actually widespread, have had a difficult life or have even died for the cause. This happens when the society states verbally (or writing) his consent to a given value of the intellectual pattern, but such behavior is not widespread in society, i.e. the value has little Static Quality in the social pattern and then is not a animal value (because it's not practiced). Who sacrifices himself to such a cause has a hard life, but in the meanwhile receives the admiration of all other people, that admire him and often say "I'd like to be like you."
The contradiction or injustice is only apparent, since even if we all approve a value at the intellectual level, the morally acceptable (and winning) behavior in the animal scheme may be very different (a discussion on this subject is available here).


Example: western civilization has as intellectual values culture and education. Almost every parent would like his children to be good at school, with good results, getting a bachelor degree or a postgraduate degree. Even the students themselves say they would like to be good at school, to have more brain, to pass the exams successfully. But actually, brilliant students are often emarginated, derided as "nerds" or simply just used to copy during exams.
It's rare for a brilliant student to be socially successful, since in the social pattern of the western civilization education, intelligence and culture are not animals values: to be socially successful it's necessary to have very different skills and aspirations, as we already discussed above.

Decency and discretion

The sense of shame is one of the few cases where intellectual values are able to impose quickly themselves on social patterns. Usually, before an intellectual value can change the behavior of individuals, becoming a social value, are necessary at least a few generational changes. The sense of shame can impose itself rather easily in the society, for one simple reason: is not possible to adopt secretly the opposite behavior, because by definition, those who ignore decency when nobody looks at them, are not breaking any moral value. In other words does not even make sense to assume that there may be a social value opposite to shame and decency, because if people stating verbally that it's right to cover our nudity would go around naked, they would become immediately aware of the mechanism of self-deceiving in real time.


The example shows how the mental values can impose easily, becoming then social values, if it's not possible to behave in a way different from the ideals held at the intellectual level. The sense of decency works also as a good example to explain the difference between animals values of the "society pattern", and animal values of the "human pattern". Even if the society adopts as moral value the sense of decency, a single individual will continue to feel the animal need to get comfortable undressing when the weather is hot, scratching intimate parts, putting fingers in the nose etc.. Social morality does not change the morality of individuals, but simply pursues a repression action. People continue to meet the animals needs but they do it secretly, away from the other's sight.
In the same time, if naked in public, human beings experience a genuine sense of shame, and this happens because the sense of shame is a social moral value, although it's not an organic moral value.

Education, good manners and the truth

Developmental psychology offers a vast documentation on the role of lying in social relations. Many studies show how the children until the age of 4-5 years have great difficulties in learning the so-called "good manners", just because this means to lie or hide the truth in the name of education. In order to be socially successful, and not collect enemies, it's necessary to reject unwanted invitation with a polite excuse, to console those who are suffering even when they are wrong, to defend nobles principles even if we did not practice them, smile at whose we do not like, contribute to gifts for colleagues even though we don't love them. To belong to the society we must learn what can be done openly, and what can be done provided that we do not say it. We all agree that it is good practice to admit to masturbating, telling the misdeeds, and generally saying what we are thinking.


In other words: being honest is not a good manner, i.e. sincerity is not a social value.
Yet, in the same time, society continually teaches and preaches the value of sincerity, and openly condemns hypocrisy, deceiving and lying in general, and for this reason sincerity is a intellectual value. This is perhaps the most marked social contradiction, the stronger and more difficult to accept, since it reflects the cause the contradiction itself, that's the mechanism of self-deception. In other words, since human beings normally lie to themselves without being aware of it, it's perfectly natural that the bigger lie is precisely the belief that we are sincere people. The concept can be expressed concisely through an aphorism that may sound paradoxical, but it is sadly true.

The firs step toward the policy of truth is the confession to be a liar

The self-awareness culture

It's natural to object to earlier statements, such as responding "I do not contribute to the habit of recommendations " or "I lead a good honest life". Before responding in this way, we should be completely honest with ourselves. Imagine having a relative with few months of life left and knowing that a given operation could save him, but the waiting time is one year long. If a friend told us "the hospital principal is a relative of mine, I have just to call him and we can make the operation in a week". Are you really sure that you will refuse, saying - "no, thanks, I prefer to be honest and not look for a shortcut"? The mechanism of the self-deception make us believe that "we are not doing anything wrong", when we break some moral value for a good reason, in order to protect us from a terrible truth: if the waiting time of an operation in hospital it's months or years is also (but not only) due to the thousands of people who accept that a friend put a "good word", because they believe they deserve such help or because they think having a noble reason.

Most people accepting a recommendation usually justifies saying that "I was qualified for that job" or "I needed a recommendation just to get in, but I had the job thanks to my abilities". Here is another effect of the mechanism of self-deceiving: we deny to have collaborated to produce a given social epiphenomenon just because, in our case, the end justifies the means. Unfortunately, epiphenomena are produced by the behavior of the units of the lower level and not by their motivation or justifications. So if we implemented a behavior, we are responsible for the spread of the corresponding epiphenomenon in above static level, in this case the society, and thus we are responsible for the fact that such behavior is a moral value of the human society.

This does not mean that our behavior is wrong or immoral. We are saying the exact opposite: materialism, corruption, aesthetics, traditions and the martyrdom of innovators are moral value of the static scheme "human society", since these values as encouraged, teached and finally approved by the society as morally valid.

The only sore point, in our opinion, it's the lack of awareness in people contributing to food these values, deeds and actions, and in the meanwhile stating to suffer because the society seems "unfair" or "incorrect". If we live in such a society it's our fault, not a society's fault. Social values are the effect of our behavior, since they are not the effect of our ideas, speeches, press conferences or good intentions. The mechanism of self-deceiving always suggest us to look at whose that behave worse than us, to ease our conscience and avoid threatening our self-esteem, and this is a good thing. The mechanism of self-deceiving protects us from a truth that is uncomfortable to accept. No matter how much we contribute to the generation of an epiphenomenon, whether we evade taxes for one dollar or one million, whether we leave lights on in our home or in an entire building, whether we create pollution with a scooter or a truck. The epiphenomena are the result of the human mass action, and if our behavior goes in that direction, then we're active contributor of a given moral social value.

Working on cultural awareness, accepting the fact that we are all responsible for the reality we live in, we gain a clearer view of social dynamics. Event when aware of our faults, we can still complain about injustice, but aiming to vent our feeling instead of aiming to get angry with other people. Awareness allow us to laugh at human limitations, without blaming others, but looking instead at our small daily actions, recognizing them as the cause of problems we complain, laughing about this and then going on with a light heart, without any unjustified bitterness towards society.

Some people might (rightly) disagree with our thesis, do not understand it or approve it, since the "passive acceptance" of the social problems could seem a sign of laziness or indifference, or may seem just an excuse to endorse the status quo of things, without doing anything to change it.
People thinking that we have the duty to work hard in order to improve the human society, instead of just watching, are invited to read the section about how to resolve social contradictions, where is discussed the importance of the awareness culture as a way to resolve conflicts between social values and intellectual values.

Similar topics

• The metaphysics of Quality
• Static patteners
• The human society
• Epiphenomenon definition
• How to resolve the social inconsistency
• Politics, corruptions, unemplyoment and criminality