Principles of scientific morality

With our thoughts fixed on the teachers of the rationalist schools, we have written Principles of Scientific Morality, with the conviction that, without their cooperation, the fruit of this humble work of mine would be small.

I earnestly ask my colleagues not to forget that all reading should be commented on so that the child gets the greatest possible benefit from it, and that this little work should preferably be so.

Since it deals with the subjects that are of most interest, that most occupy the human mind and also, therefore, that most divide men, it is essential that children be able to ask all kinds of questions, in the parts that seem doubtful to them. I hope not only that the questions will be answered, but also that they will not wait for a sentence or paragraph to be incomprehensible to them, but will come to their aid with the clarifications and details that the age or limited understanding of the students requires.

I also ask the teachers, in order to make the prevailing social immobility more evident, to gather all the facts reported by the press and found in history books or other books to relate them to the children when the opportunity arises.

Every teacher must use the news which is given in the newspapers, almost without comment, whether of a man dying of hunger, or of another crushed by a falling scaffold, or of a firedamp explosion in which hundreds or thousands of miners perish, almost always because of the greed of the employers, or of soldiers committing suicide to escape undeserved punishment, or of barbaric acts committed in colonial wars or of other kinds. There are innumerable facts which can serve as an example to convince children of the reality of social injustice.

My colleagues will not fail to help children to understand what a moral society can be, emphasizing that it will only be possible among men with kind feelings, and convinced that the happiness of others is indispensable for their own happiness, and that a society will form itself; It will not be formed by governments, nor by the wise, nor by privileged people, but by themselves when they are moral men and have the will and effort to establish it.

Teachers who act in this way will know the ineffable satisfaction that every moral man enjoys and experiences, since his enthusiastic companion takes up teaching.

Chapter I: Individual Morality

The first thing that every girl and boy must do is to preserve his or her health.

A sick person does not enjoy life and causes inconvenience and suffering to others.

To avoid illness, these two important practices are recommended:

— Perfect cleanliness.

— Avoid all abuse.

Perfect cleanliness is understood as the habit of washing one’s whole body every day upon getting up, a habit that is as easy to acquire and practice as it is later pleasant and beneficial.

It is enough to leave a jar of water in the bedroom so that in the morning it is at the same temperature as that of the room, and to have a basin, a sponge, a bucket, a bar of soap and a towel available.

In addition to the morning bath, one should wash one’s hands and proceed to clean one’s teeth and nails, as many times a day as one thinks convenient.

The clean body should be covered and warmed with clothes of the most cleanliness possible.

The furniture and belongings in our private homes must also be kept as clean as possible. We must also try to keep the floors and walls of the rooms where we live free of dust and other dirt.

All houses and buildings must be clean, as must the clothes of the individuals and the individuals themselves.

Cleanliness must also be extended to the vehicles we use: cars, trams, ships, etc., etc., otherwise, by using poorly cleaned carriages, infectious diseases are frequently contracted. Each person must avoid dirtying them.

In the same way that we will avoid harmful infections on the outside of the body, we will avoid them on the inside, with even greater cleanliness, if possible.

A healthy and well-ordered diet is the greatest enemy of doctors and pharmacists.

The preferred foods, if the preference is reasoned and is in perfect condition of preservation, are the most suitable.

The kitchen, its utensils and the table service must always shine like precious diamonds.

Meals should be spaced as evenly as possible and one should never get up from the table, satiated. One should eat only to satisfy one’s appetite, and it is preferable not to do so entirely.

Drink is the most likely to be abused and causes serious inconveniences.

All stimulating drinks are dangerous.

We strongly recommend that children do not get used to drinking liquor, alcohol, beer, or any of those specialties that are offered under the name of aperitifs or digestives.

Even wine is not necessary, contrary to what the vulgus believes, because what best suits a healthy meal is pure, crystalline water.

The thing is easy, by acquiring the habit from childhood. We will make the same recommendation regarding tobacco. It is not advisable to smoke.

The use of tobacco carries with it many inconveniences, not the least of which is the adulteration of the air that its smoke produces in closed premises, causing discomfort to those who have to breathe such an atmosphere.

When we advise against smoking or drinking liquor, alcohol, and even avoiding wine, we do so because it is good for health, and its abuse degenerates into vice.

But we understand that, in a meeting of friends, where joy reigns, one can very well make an exception to the rule, drinking a little wine, taking a small glass of liquor, even smoking a cigarette, if one has pleasure and taste for it.

It would not hurt to go beyond the rule from time to time, if it is done with the moderation that understanding determines.

There are other excesses that should be avoided besides those of food and drink.

These are those that are committed at work, at play, in any exercise and even at rest.

If it is an intellectual work, whether studying, producing literary works or any other art, whether professing or wasting one’s thoughts on other matters.

If one does manual or physical work of any kind; if in games, recreations and sports, if in all the above one abuses oneself, forcing oneself to an exercise greater than that which one’s brain or muscles permit, one wears out one’s organism and becomes ill.

Let us call, at this point, the attention of teachers to the need not to make children study more than their intelligence permits.

Just as excessive work is harmful to a body, so is excessive rest, if it is carried to an extreme.

Reasonable bodily movement is beneficial to the health of the body, just as reasonable intellectual work is beneficial to the development of intelligence.

A person who lives a clean life, eats properly and does not commit physical or intellectual excesses will maintain his health and thereby lay the first foundation of morality.

Once the most important thing has been obtained, it will be easy to obtain the rest.

First of all, it is advisable to use the most authentic words possible in language, those that faithfully translate the thought.

In this way, misinterpretations will be avoided, and the abuse that many commit by using words with a different meaning than the one intended will be corrected.

Correct language must be accompanied by correct conduct.

Correct conduct will be the person who is sincere in all his acts, does not hide the truth and loves freedom and the good for all.

The ideal for everyone must be to be able to be just in all the acts of life.

One cannot be just if one does not know much, if one does not know everything.

Not yet having, in the human brain, the knowledge of everything, we must be content with studying the origin of the evils that populate the earth.

Since there is, or must be, a remedy for the ills we know, knowing the cause of human misfortunes will make it easy for us to avoid them by eliminating their origin.

The duty, therefore, of every person is to try to know the causes of everything that afflicts humanity, in order to dedicate himself to how to combat them successfully and fruitfully.

Thus we consider that the first moral duty of man consists in preserving his health. We now add the second duty: that, by his upright and most just conduct possible, he makes himself worthy of himself.

Chapter I Summary

A moral man is one who maintains his health and has a conduct worthy of himself.

In order to maintain health, it is recommended to be physically clean, to keep everything around us clean, and to avoid excesses in food, drink, and physical and mental work.

In order to be worthy of oneself, one must have a conduct such that it is evident that, if all men followed it equally, humanity would live in peace and freedom.

Chapter II: Morality in relation to one’s neighbor

The word neighbor designates every other person.

The first moral duty of the child, in relation to others, consists in realizing that on his own, after being born, he could not have lived.

He owes his existence to the care that his parents or other people have had for him.

This fact will make him understand that there is a bond of solidarity between men, consisting of the help that we receive from others, without which life would be impossible.

He will also observe that not only children need the support of others, but that it is also indispensable for the sick, the invalid and the elderly.

From this observation the child will deduce that, when he becomes a man, he must contribute with his personal work to the support of the elderly, the sick and children.

The child, whether young or moral, as we have described him in the previous chapter, will try to instil his morality in all those around him, in all those with whom he may have relations.

As some will listen to him and others will not want to listen to him or imitate him, he will be forced to establish two categories of men.

In the first category he will put the scholars, those who recognize that abuses are committed in society and believe that it is the duty of all to avoid them and fight them until they are suppressed.

The second category will be made up of men who are enemies of all change, those who do not have faith in a future of human happiness or do not follow a good path to achieve it.

The moral man will be a friend of the former, he will study with them, he will be part of the Educational Centers where they meet and he will advocate their creation where they do not exist.

He will not offer his friendship to those of the second category, because he considers them immoral for their indifference to misery, their support for the regime that allows it or their negligence in banishing it.

In the relations that he has with these, he will not hide his ideas and his ideal of social improvement, because with his regular conduct and good behavior, he will make many reflect and will contribute to the morality of some.

Being a known fact that we are not born taught and we acquire ideas and knowledge of things according to what surrounds us, and according to the reflections that they suggest to us, we will not hold anyone responsible for the ideas acquired or the thoughts expressed.

We will try, yes, to demonstrate the error in which those we call immoral live, by presenting them with convincing arguments, but without getting angry with them if we do not succeed in convincing them, because truth and error are as deeply rooted in human brains.

We must always consider in good faith the adversary who contradicts our theories, believing that he defends his own out of an erroneous conviction.

However, when we find ourselves in front of an educated person of a certain social position, we will not believe in his good faith, but in his interest in maintaining a regime that protects all privileges.

We will not get angry with such a person either, because anger would be useless. We will only make him understand that we consider him worthy of being considered a friend of men of bad faith.

There is no doubt that there are many people in bad faith, and that the demonstrations we can make of how harmful they are to the general welfare are not enough to make them change their behavior or conduct. We must give up trying to convince people when they act in bad faith.

But, since we must not give up fighting evil, we will dedicate all our activity to spreading good doctrines among people in good faith.

Only in the union of many, of all those convinced and with a good organization prepared to establish a moral society, will it be possible to overcome the power of the immoral.

Chapter II Summary

All men are responsible for social injustices, by the mere fact of being part of this immoral society.

Only the man of moral conduct who does all he can to instill in others love for his neighbor and sincere and positive brotherhood is exempt from responsibility.

The moral man will not live in isolation. He will seek company and will meet with the moral or those who wish to be moral.

He will try to convince those who, by mistake, are immoral.

He will not be angry with those who are consciously immortal, but he will consider them enemies of good and as such he will refuse his friendship.

He will dedicate his efforts to associating good men so that, with their will and energies, they can remove from the world the immoralities that disfigure it.

Chapter III: Morality before property and authority

When one seeks the origin of all authority, one invariably finds the defense of a property.

If property did not exist, there would be no need for anyone to constitute himself as an authority.

Morality distinguishes, however, between properties and between authorities, because there are two kinds of both.

Individual ownership of everything that is necessary for maintenance, shelter, and the satisfaction of mental needs is plausible.

It is also understandable that one uses his authority for the defense of what is useful to his existence as a cultured and free person, that is, moral.

But the ownership of superfluous things is not plausible, nor is it moral, while there are individuals who lack the essentials for life.

Just as it is not plausible, nor moral, for authority to be exercised for the conservation of superfluous properties in some individuals, when many others do not have food, shelter, or shelter.

The first men who took possession of lands larger than they needed for their own support were the first immoral proprietors.

They increased their immorality when they used cunning or force to make others work for their own benefit.

The first ignorant or unfortunate people who accepted work for another, without the fruit of their work being equally distributed, were the first promoters of immorality.

The first immoral owners used, at first, their own authority, which their intelligence and cunning gave them, to make themselves obeyed voluntarily.

Later they used the authority of others, creating it among the ignorant or unfortunate exploited themselves. It was enough for them to choose the most brutal, or the most intelligent, and they named them watchmen, foremen, directors, etc.

They adorned them with distinctions, sometimes with a feather or a stripe, and also gave them, when necessary, a stick, a bow, or another weapon to make themselves respected.

However, they did not share with them the product of the exploited work, because these new exploited, although less interested than the others, were content with the insignia and representation of authority.

The vanity and pride of wearing a feather or a stripe made them accept this unworthy role of guardians of other people’s property, even though they were miserably paid for such positions.

There is no immoral act comparable to that performed by the first bold men who dared to declare themselves owners of land.

Only the immorality represented by those who first submitted to such audacity, and by those who lent their support to the bold men, can equal it.

From this recognition of property and from this recognition of authority to preserve property, the possibility arose for all kinds of abuses to be committed in the future.

The passion for possession was henceforth the most dominant among men.

The bad example given by the first immoral men was reverberated everywhere.

Everyone wanted to be a property owner, or to exercise authority in order to preserve the property of those who owned it.

And the descendants of those who worked for others continued to be content with what was given to them for their work.

They even suffered hunger and died of starvation because of the respect that had been instilled in them for property.

Unfortunately, this respect has been passed down to the present day by those who possess nothing but their misery, their poverty and their ignorance.

At the same time, the audacity of the owners increased, reaching what we see today, where, with the metal extracted from the earth, they obtain everything that is produced by the work and intelligence of those who have nothing and possess nothing.

Such is the immorality of both those who offer to extract the metal from the earth, and of those who call themselves the owners of it, receiving its fruits.

For a very small part of the metal received from the former, the others build the houses, make the clothes and do whatever makes the life of the owners pleasant.

Meanwhile, the bricklayers, the tailors and all the workers and artists who contribute to the well-being of the owners, suffer all kinds of deprivation, if not death, for lack of the metal and the land that they leave in someone else’s position.

If the unfortunate ever complain and demand a little more bread, they are threatened with being replaced by others who, not even having bread, would be content with less than theirs.

And if they try to rebel against what they believe to be injustice, they are frightened and sometimes killed by those in authority, in the preferred service of the possessors, the primitive reason for their existence.

Men in authority, who defend superfluous property, are no less immoral before reason and equity.

Chapter III Summary

The first people who seized land were immoral.

So were those who tolerated it and those who exercised authority to maintain it.

Only that property which serves to maintain personal life is moral.

The seizure of land has made the seizure of all other things possible.

It seems to the mind immoral that some men should possess whatever is necessary for the existence of others.

Chapter IV: Religious Morality

Immoral properties could not have been preserved indefinitely if religion had not come to the aid of the owners.

Nor could immoral authorities have been exercised without the support that the men who exercised them received from religion itself.

For this reason, incontestably, religion is, and all religions are, marked with the stigma of the lowest immorality.

Those who first appropriated the lands used the religious ideal to consecrate their authority and that of their representatives.

Priestly castes were established, whose individuals attributed to themselves the representation of the Sun or of some god.

Their mission could have been normal, if they had limited themselves to using their intelligence instructing others on the things and practices favorable to their health and their freedom.

But this was not the case, since they abused the prestige that their knowledge gave them for proprietary or authoritarian consecration, as if emanating from a divine, supernatural power.

At the same time, they consoled the poor, the miserable, assuring them that earthly life was insignificant compared to the heavenly life that awaited them after death.

And, although it may seem incredible, they were not only believed by the first unfortunates, but also, today, there are millions of men who continue to console themselves for the pains of life, hoping for rewards for another senseless, impossible life.

It is in this deception in which people have been and are being held that religions have lost and are losing all moral strength, all moral respect.

To make those who live in perpetual suffering expect pleasures and happiness after death is a mockery that moral men cannot forgive those who call themselves professional religious.

Whatever point of view one may look at it from, one will always find that the person who serves a religion lives by deception, lies, and the most patent falsehood.

No representative of any religion has been able, or can, prove that there is a supernatural being, or that there is another life after death.

None of them can present any data that proves the existence of heaven, hell, or purgatory.

Asked separately about the existence of these three myths, and about the nature and forms of their god and souls, they all contradict each other.

Absolutely no one, not even the most daring, who call themselves scientists, can make the slightest experiment that would prove even a part of the truth in their assertions.

Neither the existence of God, nor of gods, nor of souls, nor that of heaven, nor that of hell, nor of purgatory has been able to be proven in any way.

It may seem strange that, lacking a scientific basis, all religions have been able to maintain themselves, although they have been transformed according to the needs of the time.

It is not strange, because the same has happened to the idea of property.

In the same way that some men accepted, and others have continued, to work for others and to recognize the property of others when one lacks one’s own, in the same way the primitives accepted, and later the following ones continued, the idea of the afterlife, the idea of a god.

For the same reason authorities exist.

Since childhood we are accustomed to practicing a religion, to respect and admire men in uniforms and insignia, and to give alms, thereby recognizing the natural possession of fortunes or misery and poverty.

These ideas are engraved in the brains of children, and it is not strange that they are generally preserved intact for a long time in life, just as they were engraved in the minds of primitive men and transmitted to future generations.

It was necessary for authoritarian power to be abused in order for rebellions to occur and, with them, study and observation.

From the study and observation of the first rebels, science was born.

Through science, which is the truth of things, the deception of religions, the illegitimacy of all superfluous property, and the immorality of all authority were discovered.

Since science became popular, religions declined, losing the strength and prestige they had when truth was forbidden fruit.

Chapter IV Summary

All religions are immoral because they affirm things that science denies.

Above all, they are immoral because with their doctrines they justify social injustices.

By declaring that there will always be poor and rich people, they become supporters of superfluous property.

The representatives of religions have provoked and continue to provoke wars to maintain their prestige, and not so that the poor may have their place at the banquet of life.

Religion is immoral because it does not preach human brotherhood, but submission to laws that they call divine, but which are incomprehensible.

Chapter V: Military morale

In order to ensure that superfluous property was respected by the destitute masses, the authority of the priestly caste was not enough.

The threats with which the priests frightened the rebels, after death, were not enough, because not everyone was terrified by hell.

It was necessary to create armed bodies to defend the properties, punishing those who dared to treat them without the due respect.

The first immoral owners surrounded themselves, therefore, with guards, whose only object was to protect their persons and the goods they had seized.

Feeling strong, with such help, their audacity grew and they used the force at their command to expand their power, seizing more land and other goods.

The more the estates increased, the greater the number of guards they required, and this desire for power gave rise to struggles between owners, to snatch from each other what they most desired, and against the rebellions of the dispossessed.

From then dates this phenomenon, as extraordinary as it is degrading, of seeing that the powerful use, to defend themselves against the crowd, individuals taken from the crowd itself.

It is a talent demonstrated by the owners of the superfluous which puts the intelligence of some men very high.

This intelligence has been exercised, only, by the priests, who give themselves a life of pleasure, advising their faithful to the greatest resignation in their hardships and sufferings.

Once some men had accepted the role of defending, even at the cost of their lives, the property of others, for a salary or a tiny part of the booty taken, the military caste was created.

It was composed, first of all, of men who loved adventure more than peaceful and utilitarian work.

Secondly, those who were easily dazzled by the brilliance of uniforms were and are attracted to the profession of arms.

And, finally, part of the troops of the unfortunates, who believed it was a duty to expose their lives in defense of people and things, considered themselves to be of a superior origin than their own.

The possessions acquired by cunning and force were given the name of homeland by the first who managed to establish themselves solidly over time and in a place. While the owners came to an agreement with each other, whenever possible, to divide up the land, the soldiers considered themselves happy to be the defenders of their country.

The truth is that countries often change masters, but the majority of those who are part of them, and who own nothing of the country, are always content with the explanations given by the new masters.

The first fault committed by the first men who agreed to be defenders of other people’s property created a custom, and this custom has been transmitted, unfortunately, as all customs are transmitted.

The curious thing about the case is that the act of the primitives, which was voluntary and, for the moment, circumstantial, has been transformed, thanks to the intelligence of some and the ignorance of others, into obligatory acts.

Indeed, almost everyone today believes that it is a duty, the most sacred, to defend the homeland, even if one has nowhere to fall dead, nor where to get anything that is most indispensable to one’s life.

The rooting of this supposed duty in the human mind has been so effective for the owners of the goods that make up the homelands, that it has come to be possible to dispose of the lives of others as the most natural thing in the world.

Originally, the mission of the armed forces was to defend the land that was called homeland or to make conquests to enlarge it.

It should not be forgotten that soldiers, defenders of the land or conquerors of new lands, do not usually own land or acquire for themselves any part of the conquered lands.

Nowadays the armed force is maintained with the same pretext of protecting the homeland, which is called common; but, in reality, troops are used to defend the interests of the masters and proprietors of them.

In primitive times, the men of arms knew, at least, whom they defended, they knew why they fought and they did not ignore why they risked their lives.

But today even this consolation is not available to soldiers. Military ordinances are so severe that they require the use of arms when a commander is in charge.

The words addressed by the current Emperor of Germany to some soldiers have become famous, because they summarise the barbarity that the military spirit represents.

Wilhelm II told his soldiers that they should fire their weapons at their parents and brothers, if they received orders to do so from their superiors. Can there be greater immorality?

Can one understand that a person, in a fit of madness, produced by an argument or an act of violence, would attempt against the life of a fellow man, a friend, a brother and even his own father.

But it cannot be explained, morally, that because some workers, for example, go on strike and express their discontent with their masters, some soldiers come and kill them, as sometimes happens, on unquestionable orders from above.

Military immorality is, in this sense, also indisputable.

By the mere fact that every soldier is obliged to use his weapons against his fellow men, by simple order received, without being able to discuss whether or not it is reasonable, military service is evidently immoral.

One could call military morality the one of the army that exists to defend the society, people or nation, within which all citizens are free, being able to satisfy all their material, moral or intellectual needs.

And that there are other peoples or individuals interested in losing their freedom and their well-being, they arm themselves and defend themselves to preserve the good that benefits all equally.

In this case, the use of weapons would be highly moral, because it would be conscious, it would obey a common need and the result would be equally beneficial for all.

Chapter V Summary

There is no military morality, because the use of force is unconscious.

The case of arms is understandable when it is in defense of one’s own freedom.

The use of arms is immoral when it is in defense of foreign interests and to the detriment of others.

The voluntary soldier can only be excused by his ignorance of what his profession represents.

The forced soldier is a victim of the errors committed by our ancestors and transmitted by routine, by religions and by the cunning of the leaders of the people.

Chapter VI: Judicial morality

In order to preserve superfluous property, the existence of religions, armed troops and permanent armies was not enough.

Belief in an afterlife and forced submission gave rise to many doubts, doubts that provoked too much gossip and terrible rebellions.

Some people wanted to attribute an origin of law to what was only a matter of cunning and plunder.

A caste of special men was therefore created, granting them all kinds of prestige, charged with settling the differences that arose among men.

Although the owners were the creators of this new caste, as the defender of their interests, they made people believe that the special men would settle the differences with all justice and they were given the name of judges.

The sentences of the first judges were taken by the ignorant people as divine oracles. Just as priests spoke and speak in the name of their god, and troops fought and still fight, imploring divine protection, when both belligerent armies do not say they obey his command, so judges judge in the name of a heavenly justice.

In most of the places where this function called justice is exercised today, there is still the effigy of a divinity, to give more importance to the sentences handed down.

The established powers know well how much everything incomprehensible, everything that seems to have a supernatural origin, hurts the popular imagination.

For this reason, they clothe judges in imposing robes, as they clothe soldiers in other showy uniforms, priests in their extravagant attire, and all those who exercise any authority.

However, beneath the severe robes, and above the symbolic effigies, the reasonable man, that is, the moral man, sees in judges fallible men, subject to error.

In fact, if we study the judge as a private man, we find him in the same vices as his fellow men and with the same passions that, more or less, dominate all of us.

And, under these conditions, it cannot be admitted that an imperfect man should be the arbiter of the disputes that arise between others, also imperfect.

The act of a judge condemning a fellow man is as immoral as that of a soldier imposing his unconscious force, and that of a priest stating things that are incomprehensible to him.

Studying the origin of the judiciary, one becomes convinced that it exists only to maintain the owners in the enjoyment of their superfluous possessions.

This idea has become so deeply rooted in the minds of judges that all codes and all laws obey this main concern.

Even in the smallest details, when studying the statistics of sentences in all the courts of the world, one is confirmed in this obvious truth.

A judge, or several judges gathered together, more easily acquit a person who has killed a neighbor than one who has appropriated something of another’s property.

Even the general public condemns what is called theft with more fervor and resentment than other acts also classified as crimes.

The idea that property is the most precious thing and the thing that must be respected the most has gradually infiltrated the human mind.

This is why judges are always so severe against anyone who takes possession of what has become known as personal property.

If all men had what they needed to satisfy their own needs, what is now called theft would not be understood, nor would it be carried out.

In a perfect society, judges would not be necessary, because they are useless, and in the present society they are only useful to the owners of the lands and of all the wealth that is extracted and produced from them.

Nor should it be said that judges are necessary to punish what are called crimes of passion, since they themselves are subject to the commission of the same acts.

If the efforts spent on punishment were used to prevent, instruct and facilitate a life of freedom and love for all men, the courts that are called justice would be completely idle.

Chapter VI Summary

Since judges are as imperfect as other men, it is immoral to assume the right to condemn them.

The judiciary was created primarily to protect superfluous property.

For this reason they condemn what they call robbery more severely than violent killings of their neighbors.

Originally, justice was given a divine origin so that it would be accepted by the masses.

Almost everywhere, the same origin or another of an eminently superior character is still sought to be preserved.

But the reasonable man knows the true origin of the judge and, for this reason, considers such a position immoral.

Chapter VII: Political Morality

Politics is said to be the science of government, or the art of governing states, and we say that it is the art of preserving the property of those who use it to the detriment of others.

The first men who appropriated lands larger than they needed for their maintenance were the first politicians.

The men who continued to keep and increase their possessions, according to their cunning and according to the weakness or ignorance of others, were the continuators of politics.

The representatives of all religions, who influence with their doctrines the conservation of superfluous properties, are the servants of those politicians, and politicians themselves. The armed institutions, which with their force protect and maintain the same properties, are the supporters of the same politicians, and make politics.

And all the so-called courts of justice, which, as we have seen in the previous chapter, have as their main task the protection of superfluous property, support the above-mentioned politicians.

The politicians who call themselves conservative in all nations are logical in themselves if they have superfluous property, as long as there are beings who lack the essentials of life.

There is, therefore, a conservative policy, opposite to which there is always another policy that calls itself liberal.

The names sometimes change, depending on the nation and the monarchical or republican regime, but if the names of the political parties change, the meaning of the policy does not change. In all nations there is at least one party that tends to preserve the laws and customs; that is, the right to possess everything, and another party that works, apparently, to modify them.

We have already said that conservative politics is immoral, because it works for the preservation of the prevailing immorality. The politics of those who fight the conservatives is more or less moral according to the end that individuals propose.

There are many kinds of politicians called liberals, democrats, republicans, radicals, socialists, etc., who say they are against the conservatives.

For the sake of children’s understanding, we will make only two distinctions between politicians who are not satisfied with the present state of things.

We will call the former reformist politicians and the latter revolutionary politicians.

It is worth noting that the conservatives themselves have had to reform their laws and their government measures, in the face of the ever-growing protest against privileges.

They have had to make concessions to the reformists and the revolutionaries, preferring to give something up for fear of losing everything.

But their concessions have always been apparent, because they have taken great care that, in the end, nothing was changed regarding the right to property.

One of the concessions that the conservative parties make, when the people are too threatening, is to grant them the parliamentary system, so that the representatives of the nation can settle the difficulties or differences.

They give a kind of electoral right, so that the claimants can name their deputies who will attend assemblies where everything must be dealt with.

Governments modify the parliamentary system, or the rotation systems for the appointment of deputies, according to the circumstances and fears of the discontented people.

Revolutions have been made with an economic sense, demanding bread and work, and they have always been appeased with promises of freedom, reforms and rights.

But the right to life has never been established, nor has the reform of the right to property in an equitable, that is, communist, sense.

This is the axis of politics.

All politics and all politicians revolve around settling this fundamental question of whether it is fair that some men should possess everything, and others should possess nothing.

As we have already said, there are conservative politicians who politicize so that nothing changes in the current state of things, because it is not convenient for them to be the owners of everything.

These are conservative politicians who support all the governments of all nations, under the direction of an emperor, a king or a president of a republic.

When these conservative politicians, possessors of the lands and other wealth of nations, fear too much the popular anger, they give the governments to liberal reformists, thus calming and deceiving the people.

If there are reformists in good faith who believe that with their reforms a regime of equity will be achieved, they can be considered unconscious immoral politicians.

But most of them are as immoral as the conservatives, because they defend with equal tenacity the laws protecting superfluous property.

All governments, all laws, all regulations and all public administrations and institutions tend and serve the maintenance of large property owners and superfluous fortunes.

All political parties that form part of governments, all politics that is called governmental, are, therefore, immoral politics.

The voters of all parties become accomplices of governmental immorality by accepting a failed and highly corrupting system.

If the voters who consider themselves revolutionaries reflected that with their direct, individual and collective action, the environment and the way of being of the people could be modified, none of them would vote for any representative.

Could not the thousands of voters (35 thousand in one election in Barcelona and 80 thousand in another in Paris), with their direct action in their own town, do more than their few representatives (five in Barcelona and one in Paris) far away from it?

There is only one moral policy: it is the revolutionary policy whose sole object is the overthrow of the entire governmental machine, which represents the immorality of property.

All politicians are moral who work for the establishment of a system in which wealth and land are common, and in which men can satisfy their needs without detriment to the needs of others.

The ideal of moral politicians is expressed in this way: to each according to his needs, from each according to his means.

Chapter VII Summary

There are two types of politics:

–Passive politics.

–Active politics.

Any politics that, whether reformist or not, tends to sustain superfluous property is passive.

Active politics is that which tends to radically, absolutely change the capitalist regime.

Passive politicians are immoral.

Only revolutionary politicians who tend to establish a regime of justice are moral.

Chapter VIII: Patriotic morality

There are countless tricks that the masters of everything use to preserve their privileges.

As if, despite their inventions of religions, armies, courts and political systems, they could not convince the dispossessed of everything, they invented the entity homeland, with which they achieved no small success.

Indeed. For many people the homeland is something great, elevated, indispensable, worthy of all loves.

It is true that there are few who do not retain, during their life, a very tender memory of the place where they spent the first years of their existence.

This very tender memory is transformed, little by little, into deep love, especially through the essential love that one puts into all things and people close to them. And patriotic love is already solidified when, at school, as well as in the family and in books, newspapers and magazines, we are informed of nothing but heroic acts, sublime undertakings, and tremendous fights for and on behalf of the homeland.

We come to believe and to convince ourselves that it is a sacred duty to defend it with arms in hand, and that the greatest glory of man is to die for it when it is attacked.

But when a man begins to reflect and, above all, begins to observe when he has the fortune to travel outside his native place, and outside what he believes to be his nation, then the idea of homeland changes.

Traveling, one observes that there are beautiful places and picturesque sites everywhere.

There is knowledge that the inhabitants of other regions and other countries have the same feelings for each respective country.

And that they all feel the same love for their country, for the same reasons that he acquired his own, for his own country.

It should also be noted that if a child is taken to another nation at a very young age, the affection and love will be for the place where he lives, and the place where he was born will be almost completely forgotten, despite maintaining his nationality.

But what most changes the observer’s idea of homeland is when he realizes that in all countries there are men who take advantage of patriotic love, and others who suffer because of it. And that in all countries there are the same people who are favored by patriotic love, and the same people who are harmed by it.

It is undeniable, indeed, that those interested in preserving and sustaining patriotic love are the owners of the superfluous and the privileged of all peoples.

Because when there are fights between the powerful, to take away land or privileges from each other, they all ask for help from the people, who have no land or privileges, but in the name of patriotic love obtain all sacrifice and selfless support.

Those who suffer, those who die and those who never win in wars are the poor, those who have nothing to gain or defend.

History is full of civil and foreign struggles and wars, always apparently in defense of the interests of the country, but in reality they are carried out to defend the particular interests of some property owners and others who are privileged.

The same thing has happened and always happens in all nations, in all areas of the earth.

As an exception, we can mention popular revolutions and rebellions, not in favor of the country, but against its tyrants and exploitative masters.

Unfortunately, it rarely happens that the people are convinced of the deception in which they are held, and of their need to rebel against their oppressors.

On the contrary, he always willingly goes to fight against unknown enemies who are presented to him as enemies of his country.

In all wars there are winners and losers. Sometimes, it is some powerful people who win, and other times it is others who lose, but the poor always come out poor if they manage, perhaps, to save their lives.

The most wonderful thing is that, generally, neither the instigators of wars nor those who benefit from them risk their lives.

It is enough to invoke the name of the homeland for an immense number to rise like wild beasts to defend a myth, an impalpable thing, non-existent for them.

What homeland does he who has nothing, who lacks even the most necessary things for his existence, who, lacking a daily wage, can no longer even eat, possess?

It is understandable that those who possess a piece of land or other riches that allow them a comfortable life and security for tomorrow consider themselves patriotic.

It is also understandable that those who get rich from the work of others use the name of the homeland, because they justify the low wages given by the competition made in foreign countries.

And in each country the great landowners, the manufacturers and all those who have wage earners in great numbers say the same. Workers accept low wages, believing it to be a patriotic duty, when what they do with it is increase the goods of those who possess what constitutes the so-called homeland.

All patriotic love is immoral for the reasons stated above.

There would be a patriotic morality when the men of a region, or of any part of the earth, constituted themselves common owners of everything that existed there.

If the nationals of a common homeland could satisfy their physical, intellectual and moral needs, without any exception, they could be worthily called patriots, provided that their well-being was not at the expense of foreign peoples.

Chapter VIII Summary

The idea of a homeland is a sentiment that cannot resist deep observation.

Patriotic love favors only those who possess a part of it.

Those who are disinherited from all fortune are the victims of patriotic love.

No nation can be called moral, because in all of them injustices are committed and tolerated.

The primitive owners invented the word homeland in order to be able to preserve their privileges.

Chapter IX: Morality at work

Every living being does work, consciously or unconsciously, to feed itself.

Most beings have no other concern than to find sustenance, doing nothing else during their life, however short or long it may be.

In all the innumerable transformations that human beings have gone through, they have never ceased to obey this law, the same for all beings.

Beings perish when they lack the strength to provide themselves with nutrition, if others do not give it to them.

Those who do not receive the food necessary for their own preservation also perish.

Before acquiring human forms, it was easy for our ancestors to provide themselves with daily provisions.

Hunting, fishing and wild fruits were enough to satisfy them, as is the case today for an infinite number of animal beings.

As the intelligence of our grandparents developed, they knew how to make provisions of what was abundant for days of scarcity.

Being more skilled than other animals, they were able to domesticate some of them so that they would give them meat, milk, skins and help them hunt other species.

But the height of our ancestors’ intelligence was when, already in human form, they had the cunning to make others work for their own benefit.

Seeing that it was necessary to hunt for the little ones, perhaps from this circumstance, the most intelligent ones would be born to make themselves useful.

However the first evil cunning arose in the first misused human intelligence, the truth is that cunning became a law obeyed by almost everyone. As human intelligence increased, greater facilities were found every day to satisfy the needs of life, always increasing along with intelligence.

Human work came to produce wonders, in relation to the ever-increasing development of the intelligence of men.

But there was no relationship between the intelligence of one and the other.

While the first immoral people, of whom we have already spoken, continued and continue to take advantage of all the inventions, the poor, the slaves, continued and continue to lend themselves to it.

Since some primitive men dared to declare themselves owners of the land, work ceased to be equitable. Later, industries and trade were born, but equality in work did not.

The most astute kept and keep the greater part of the products, because the ignorant are content with the small part with which they are rewarded.

And the majority of these unfortunates consider themselves grateful, and even kiss the hand that gives them a crust of bread.

Human work came to be considered an art, producing works, in all branches of knowledge, that amaze all who contemplate them.

Unfortunately, most works of art serve only to give pleasure to those who produce nothing, to those who have nothing to produce, since they inherited or receive from others their wealth.

And the same artists who created marvelous works, despite their knowledge, despite their talent, despite their works, died and almost all die of hunger.

Ordinary workers, whatever their class, whether they are young, employees, or dependents, all contribute, they are responsible for everything that exists, and yet they are the ones who are deprived of everything, the ones who lack almost everything.

Work, as it is carried out today in all parts of the world, is immoral, most immoral.

The bricklayer spends his life building houses and palaces, and has not even a hut to shelter him. The weavers weave rich cloth for the adornment of the privileged, and they can hardly use the ordinary ones to cover their bodies.

The dressmaker and the tailor sew and make silk dresses and fur coats, and shiver with cold in winter for lack of coats.

The shoemaker makes exquisite shoes for those who have money, and often has to watch his barefoot daughters in the street.

The waiter serves exquisite delicacies in the splendid dining rooms of public and private hotels, and has to eat the slop that is given to him on filthy tables and served with less care than that shown to dogs.

The worker almost always stretches out his hand trembling when he receives the derisory wages of his work, still fearing that he will be told that the amount will be reduced, or that the work will be terminated altogether.

All these facts must upset the conscience of the moral man, who does not know whom he blames more, those who take advantage of the ignorance of others or the ignorant themselves.

The immorality of work grows when the chains that imprison the workers themselves are forged in it.

The worker builds the buildings that will serve as his prison, if one day he rebels against the tyranny of his exploiters.

He builds, restores and preserves the churches, within which he cultivates the error that the poor have no redemption, and that he has little to expect from them or to be grateful for their alms.

He builds barracks where the public force that will subdue him when he tries to emancipate himself is housed.

With his work he clothes the judges who are to condemn him, arms the soldiers who may shoot him and takes care of the priests who mock him.

He feeds his spies, his persecutors, his enemies and his executioners.

The worker suffers working so that others may enjoy, delight in and despise him.

All this work is criminal.

There will be morality in work when all of it serves, not to enrich only a few, but to increase the universal patrimony at the disposal of all, according to the needs of each one.

Chapter IX Summary

Work is indispensable for every living being.

Without work, life would be impossible.

Beings who, for whatever reason, cannot work, owe their existence to others.

It is therefore necessary to work for oneself and for the unfit to work.

But those who, being able to work, exploit the work of others, are immoral.

All work that encourages human exploitation is immoral work.

Moral work is that which is done for the benefit and good of all.

Chapter X: Social Morality

Almost all animal species live, more or less, in society.

For the sake of reproduction and, above all, to better obtain food, societies between animals are created. When life on earth began to become possible, the unions of primitive beings were unconscious.

The repetition of natural phenomena was observed by the first animals and, through this observation, the rudiments of memory were formed in them.

And then societies between animals could already be conscious.

The number of thousands of centuries that had been needed for primitive beings to have the organ to receive their observations is incalculable.

The number of thousands of centuries that the species have needed for each small transformation through which they have passed is also incalculable.

It is impossible to determine or know the number of millions of years that have passed, nor the millions of transformations that animals and plants have undergone to become what they are and are today.

Nor can anyone calculate or foresee the transformations that we will all undergo while life on this planet is still possible.

However, the experience of the past allows us all kinds of suppositions for the future.

Leaving our imagination free to do so, we can say that the man of the centuries to come, without being able to calculate the millions of them, will very well be able to differentiate himself from us even more than we are from dogs.

But, as we are not going to speak of transformism in this little book, let us continue the study of social morality.

As the animals made new observations, their experience increased and with it the receptor organ: the brain.

By acquiring experience, knowledge was acquired and this was proving the usefulness of associations.

It can be assured that all associations of animal species have as their object mutual support, to ensure the nourishment of all the individuals that make up the association.

For millions and millions of centuries there were, and are still seen, an infinity of animal species, following the same law of mutual support.

Only one animal species distinguished itself from the others by reaching a certain mental transformation: it was the human species.

In fact, it was man who, by possessing a certain degree of intelligence, instead of continuing the sublime law of mutual support, became a mutual exploiter. Intellectual development in the animal man would already have occurred so unequally that it allowed the most intelligent to form associations, apart from the less capable.

As we have already seen in the previous chapters, some primitive men managed to become masters of more lands, with the approval and approval of the others.

And those who were more intelligent since the formation of the human race continued to associate, to preserve and protect their privileges until today.

On the other hand, those who were incapacitated in the early ages of humanity have continued to be so, without being served by the constant examples of mutual support with which other animal beings defend themselves from beings stronger than them.

This inability of some to cope with the intelligence of others has allowed the existence, until today, of this social state that is impossible to qualify as moral.

The association of individuals for common defense and for mutual support is moral.

But this cannot be done to the detriment of the weak in any human society, however civilized the nations that form it may consider themselves.

In all peoples, in all nations, injustice reigns, whereby some men profit from the work of others, seeing some die of hunger and others of overnutrition.

For this reason there is no social morality anywhere on earth, except in unknown tribes where the liberty and life of all are respected.

There may be social morality, and there certainly will be, when nations become truly civilized, because now they are only so in name.

People will acquire the title of civilized when their individuals become convinced that true well-being lies in all men being able to enjoy it freely.

In all times there have been those who defended good justice in the midst of social injustice, but, because they were few, their efforts were fruitless. There were so many prejudices that dominated the crowds that the words or actions of the rebels remained without visible or immediate effect.

But now the circumstances have changed greatly.

Since science demonstrated the unity of matter and, therefore, the falsity of what religions affirm with respect to supernatural beings, religious prejudice has vanished.

Since the means of communication facilitated travel and, through the printing press, the exchange of ideas and news, the prejudices that were held about the homeland, property and authority have vanished.

Visiting foreign countries one realizes that peoples are not naturally enemies of each other, but artificially, by the ideas that the rulers instill in them.

Note also, in these visits, that everywhere there are property owners who increase their wealth through the work of those who are always poorer and poorer.

Finally, it should be noted that in every nation it is the authority that supports the privileged, and that if it were not for the fact that the poor are willing to serve as authorities, the defense of property would be impossible.

All these observations have considerably increased the number of rebels, because goodness and love of justice can always emerge from the human depths.

In addition to the love of goodness, many people have the conviction that even the privileged people of today would benefit from a change of regime.

If you reflect a little, you understand that it would be preferable to live in a society of peace, love and well-being for all, and not in the cruel struggles and uncertainty in which we live today.

For this reason, there are many people today who have a moral conduct and who work to transform immoral societies into nations where immorality is impossible.

Chapter X Summary

Societies have as their object the common good of the associates.

Each society can be formed with a specific purpose, but it is always directed to favoring the individuals who compose it.

Human society, what is called a social pact, has not responded to the origin of all societies.

The way of life of men is improperly called a social pact, because there never was such a pact.

Society was formed by the imposition of some and the weakness of others.

And since where there is imposition there is no justice, human society lacks morality.

There is no social morality in any nation in the world.

Only the people or society that achieves the freedom and well-being of its individuals without it being to the detriment of others will be moral.

Conclusion: Scientific Morality

A moral man will be one who in all his actions tends to the welfare of all other men.

In everything he does he will try to give an example of what others should do.

First of all, he must maintain his health to avoid bothering his neighbors and to be able to be useful to all.

Good health is enjoyed when one lives in careful cleanliness, with healthy food, and does not commit excesses of any kind.

The second thing that a moral man must pay more attention to is his education, studying as much as possible and always observing what happens around him.

He will educate himself about the origin of the Earth and of man in particular, and in general about all natural sciences.

Without a deep knowledge of natural sciences, other studies become difficult.

We therefore advise children to study natural sciences before undertaking other kinds of studies. Now that we are giving advice, we will give some to young men and women, certain that they will be grateful to us for it: that they read Man and the Earth by Elisee Reclus, that they keep it in their library and that they never tire of reading it, studying it and reviewing it.

When the young man reaches working age, he will surely choose the trade, profession or art that his aptitudes and tastes make him sympathetic.

With the rationalist instruction that he has received, he will have acquired the conviction that the moral man must work, must produce what his knowledge and strength allow.

But he will try to make his production a work of peace, a work of utility or moral recreation for his fellow men and for himself.

He will not, as far as possible, lend himself to increasing armaments or objects and various things that serve to promote mortality.

When age permits, he will join educational centers and popular societies that pursue human emancipation.

Within these societies and in private relationships, he will promote his ideals.

Since he will have studied the history of religions, he will be able to easily make those who retain religious prejudices lose them.

Knowing the origin of property, authority and the idea of country, he will also be able to dispel the prejudices that his companions and acquaintances hold about these matters.

Realizing that most centers and societies waste their time on trivial matters, he will strive to show them their error and their waste of time.

He will propose the study and discussion of the only topic that should interest all moral men:

End of the exploitation of man.

Beginning of a regime of peace, love and well-being for all.

Being convinced of his reason, he will be tireless in the face of the indifference of some, the skepticism of others and the doubt in the probability of success of almost everyone.

His studies and observations will have convinced him so much of the truth that he will insist, a thousand times, until he is heard, until he is attended to.

He will specify his ideal in a way that is understandable to others and of possible and immediate realization, because ideals that are considered unrealizable do not seduce.

To this end, he will draw up a plan of discussions, which will serve him for individual propaganda, as well as for collective propaganda in the societies of which he is a part.

You can divide your propaganda plan or program into three parts:

Demonstration that the current political regimes are immoral.
Most appropriate means for regime change.
Establishment and defense of a moral regime.

The demonstration that the political regimes of all nations are immoral will be easy, because there is not a single reasonable man in the world who does not agree with this.

Everyone finds it unjust, for example, that abandoned children of workers who have died or not accidentally walk the streets.

No one approves, no one thinks it fair to see old people begging after having spent their whole lives working for others and without ever having been able to give themselves, perhaps, a single day of satisfaction.

We all feel sorry for the cadaverous faces, or those denoting unspeakable suffering, of so many men and women who are seen in the streets, dragging out a life that only the name of it has.

Even the privileged, when they are frank, confess that their existence is not free from fear, doubt and restlessness. The moral man will therefore have no difficulty in approving that the first part of his program is exact, absolutely exact.

The same will not happen to him when proposing the study of the means that must be used to put an end to the present state of things.

In the discussion of the second part of his program he will find himself faced with a diversity of criteria, rooted in routine, by always reading the same newspapers and by the almost non-existent observation that men make of things.

But since he will know the defects of others, he will forgive them, he will not get angry with them and he will have the patience to discuss in a friendly manner until he succeeds in convincing them of their error.

He will highlight the means that the privileged use to maintain the immoral regime, deceit and force. The deception consists in attributing to themselves the right to possess what they possess and using religions, educational and political systems to make the people accept, tolerate and respect such rights.

The force consists in the armed authorities to dominate any rebellion that arises against their deception.

It will be demonstrated that, almost always when the origin of an evil is known, the remedy that can cure it or the prevention that can prevent it is easily found.

And that the same thing that is applied in medicine, for the suppression or cure of epidemics and diseases, can be applied to suppress social injustices.

Knowing now that it is by deception and by force that they are produced, the way to annul and suppress these two things will be studied.

With rationalist instruction, deception will disappear, and with the will of those who wish to be moral, force will be annulled and dominated.

There are two means that can be opposed to oppressive force: convincing it of its immorality and presenting it with another superior force.

Since the majority of men who make up the force that supports the capitalist regime are children of the oppressed people, the people themselves will have to convince their children of the true role they are playing.

Even those who are not children of the people can be convinced of the error in which they are supporting a regime full of misery and ignominy.

This propaganda work can be methodized by means of public lectures, distribution of explanatory pamphlets and, above all, by the individual perseverance of the members of the instructive and popular centers.

The moral man, all moral men, will have to influence so that these works are carried out with the faith and love that give the security of the fulfillment of a duty.

However, since the convincing means will not be enough, the study of the means of presenting a force superior to the oppressive force will be carried out.

The force that exists in the entire nation will be counted, and it will be known well how it is distributed in the towns and cities of the same.

We will not pursue detailing the details of the discussions and the studies that, referring to this part of the program, can be carried out in societies aspiring to be moral.

With what has been said, it is enough to understand that everything is easy when there is a conviction, since it guides a will and there is strength and energy.

It will be good, however, and we believe it is essential for the success of the enterprise, that we continue to study and discuss the third part of the program of our moral man.

When one breaks a few eggs, one usually knows whether one wants to make an omelette with them, fry them, or how one intends to cook them.

Otherwise, the eggs could remain broken, or be lost, or perhaps be used for what one least usually uses them for. In order for the studies, discussions, and energies of moral men to be completely effective, it will be necessary to plan well how a regime of morality will be established and maintained.

Here other difficulties will arise, because each person has more or less formed his own opinion on the possibility of being able to live in one way or another.

The majority of men are so imbued with the current regime that they do not conceive of a radical transformation.

Some would be content with a little more freedom, others with wage increases, those on the other side with a reduction or abolition of... those on the other side, the creation of retirement funds for the elderly, many with the abolition of friars, etc.

But few are still thinking of a complete change in the capitalist system.

The best-intentioned seek the union of capital and labor.

Useless work. A vain effort. The only logical solution is this: since all the riches extracted from the earth, processed and produced by man, belong to man and must all belong to him.

All the land, cultivated by man, must belong to man.

Everything that is useful for human life comes from the Earth or from its atmosphere. Therefore, it is from man, and it must be from man.

We say “of man” meaning all men, all women, all children, the entire human race.

It is enough for this idea to penetrate moral minds for them to find a way to put this reality into practice.

It will not be impossible, nor even very difficult, when the propaganda of our moral men, of all moral men, has penetrated the number of brains necessary to bring about the change of the capitalist regime.

It does not matter what name may be given to the new regime: moral society, communist republic, social republic, communist federal republic, etc.

What is important is that the fact be real, that is, that from the day of the new regime everything belongs to everyone, everything is common to all men.

Even the political organization itself, as far as the territorial divisions of the present municipalities are concerned, can serve as a basis for the new communist regime.

Everything that exists in the village belongs to all the inhabitants of the village.

Everything that the city contains belongs to the inhabitants of the city.

All the villages, all the cities of a region or a nation, will be federated among themselves for the exchange of products.

Money will be kept only for commercial relations with foreign countries, as long as they do not adopt the communist regime.

Railways, ships, mines, etc., all common property of the communist region or nation. All men would work hard enough to increase the daily production in order to increase the well-being of all.

The desire to beautify life would make all men artists of merit in all branches of manual, intellectual and artistic work.

The resistance societies of today would have been transformed into federated societies of all kinds of professions, to produce and exchange what is produced by all and for all. The cooperatives, founded as a test of what a communist society would be, will serve as a basis for the distribution of the products necessary for life.

Rationalist teaching can produce the moral men who are necessary to transform, in their day, this immoral society into one of love, freedom, altruism and general happiness.

This will be scientific morality.