Here’s the thing: we are all going to die. There’s no way around that. It’s how we live our life that matters. And in a universe that dictates health rather than goodness, it behooves us to come into alignment with the universe’s healthy dictation. This way, goodness is health and the very concept of goodness itself is more conducive with the way the cosmos actually works rather than the way our fear-filled forefathers falsely imagined it works.

Focusing on health launches us beyond good and evil. It gets us out of our own way. Caught up in the concept of good and evil, we rely too much on the fallible opinion of mankind. Whereas, coming into alignment with healthy and unhealthy, we can rely on the infallible dictation of universal laws. For example: universal law dictates that you need oxygen to survive. If you breathe oxygen, you are healthy and you live. If you don’t breathe oxygen, you are unhealthy and you die. This isn’t a matter of opinion. It’s not up for debate. It’s dictated by the cosmos that evolved us into a creature that needs oxygen to survive and be healthy. Health then is about survival, and the healthier we are, the better we will be at surviving.

The problem with the concept of good and evil is that it muddies the waters of health by forcing the unnecessary middleman of culture’s opinion into the mix, and such opinions are usually unfounded and outdated, usually having nothing to do with universal laws or the way the universe actually works. For example: A priest could have the opinion that sex is a sin (evil), but his opinion would be unfounded since universal law dictates that sex is a healthy function of a human animal. Health trumps cultural opinion, across the board. Whether its sex (healthy) or cigarettes (unhealthy) cultural opinion is irrelevant under the almighty dictation of universal law.

Let’s say for example, murder (unhealthy) is evil (opinion). But even still, the two-sided unhealthiness of murder trumps the two-faced middleman of cultural opinion. So, you might as well just bypass the notion of evil altogether and get to the point: that someone is dead (unhealthy) by the hand of someone else (culturally unhealthy and threatening the survival of other people.) The opinion that murder is evil is irrelevant compared to the dictation that murder is unhealthy both for the murdered person and for the other people in the vicinity of a murderer. Again, healthy/unhealthy trumps good/evil. One can imagine a series of scenarios and almost always, they can be resolved by bypassing the muddying middleman of opinionated, good/evil and focusing instead on the dictation of healthy/unhealthy.

The Concept of Moderation:

“Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily.” – William of Ockham

Inevitably such ponderings will lead to the concept of moderation. This is where things get a little more complicated. This is because moderation works on a sliding scale. It’s situational. It’s applied differently, and in varying degrees, depending upon the particular scenario. For example: the moderation one would apply to the consumption of water is considerably different to that applied to alcohol, but both degrees of moderation we dictation by universal law, although applied differently to different people depending upon weight and body type. The consumption of alcohol is neither unhealthy nor evil, but it can become unhealthy if consumed beyond the dictated scale of moderation. Once again, the concept of evil is an irrelevant, outdated and parochial abstraction.

The sliding scale of moderation can be applied to all things, and when we use the concept of healthy and unhealthy to guide us, we leave the concept of good and evil on the parochial woodpile of outdated nonsense where it belongs. Moderation and the concept of healthy/unhealthy is all we need to evolve in a progressive way.

Too much of anything can be unhealthy. Even too much water can kill you. Although it takes much more water to kill you than alcohol, you can moderate alcohol and still remain healthy. Unlike certain things like crack cocaine: the sliding scale on this drug is so unhealthy even a “moderate” amount could kill you. And even if someone’s opinion was that crack cocaine is healthy, their opinion would be invalid according to the universal law of health and moderation, just as the opinion of a priest who believes alcohol or coffee is evil would be invalid according to the same law.

Validity of opinion is not based upon the tyranny of culture, no matter how many people believe it; it isbased upon the dictation of health, no matter how many people don’t believe it. Universal law cares not about human inconvenience. And no matter how convenient it is to brainwash each other through the indoctrination of outdated notions of good and evil, it will stand that the concept of healthy and unhealthy makes notions of good and evil irrelevant. We might as well cut out the middleman-get rid of parochial good and evil and get better at using updated healthy and unhealthy with the sliding scale of moderation to determine right and wrong.