The enduring trend towards world peace has increasingly come under attack in flash points across the globe.  These ideological conflicts affect international politics as well as economic misunderstandings and disputes.  Perhaps the most prominent conflict worldwide concerns the ethical rivalry between modern secular humanism and the long-standing traditions underlying organized religion.  Indeed, our modern secular age primarily favors the trend towards moral relativism in direct opposition to the moral absolutism underpinning organized religion. Each viewpoint exhibits its own distinct range of advantages and disadvantages within such a great moral debate. Religious dogmatism enjoys the advantages of a long and established literary tradition, accompanied by well-established codes of conduct appealing to a universal sphere of influence. Such absolute dogmatism, however, further proves disadvantageous in that the fallible scriptural sources (and voluminous theological interpretations therein) often challenge the credulity of those raised in an age of science and technology.

     On the opposing end of the spectrum, moral relativism clearly embraces the scientific ethos, encouraging the search for moral certainty through the observation of the natural world (as opposed to scriptural foundation). This further accentuates moral relativism's significant weakness, in that scarcely enough scientific knowledge exists in relation to psychology and the neurosciences to propose any rationally coherent moral code of conduct (as opposed to the moral certainty claimed by organized religion).

     This enduring conflict between moral relativism and organized religion assumes an even more urgent sense of immediacy in light of the recent wave of political reversals that have occurred within the United States concerning the dramatic resurgence of republican conservatism. The stunning reversal of the liberal agenda that had dominated the preceding eight years has cast serious concerns over the future of moral relativism in light of the fundamentalist underpinnings undergirding the conservative platform. This great conservative backlash unfortunately promises to trigger considerable political tension of an unproductive nature for years to come unless some form of acceptable accommodation can be reached between the conservative and progressive ideologies.

     The key to such an achievement entails identifying the key advantages underlying each perspective, while minimizing any disadvantages therein. For the conservatives, this accounts to an emphasis upon moral clarity and certainty; whereas the progressives celebrate the power of science and technology as the foundation for ethical deliberations (albeit of a relativistic nature). The remainder of the current treatise proposes precisely such a radical cross-cultural accommodation between the liberal and the conservative perspectives, whereby hopefully circumventing any longstanding clash of cultures.

     Indeed, a planetary system of ethics is a goal that has long been anticipated on the world scene today. Although organized religion has long been celebrated as the standard bearer for the promotion of a virtuous life style, the various conflicts afflicting the world religions today clearly expose the inherent weakness to such a simplistic interpretation. Ideally, a scientific foundation for such a moral perspective should prove exceedingly beneficial. A formal behavioral-science tie-in with ethical principles proves particularly effective for removing such a cultural range of stumbling blocks. Here a foundation within behavioral psychology proves effective by invoking instinctual principles shared in common as a species (as well as the rest of animal kingdom). When expanded to include the even more abstract human-cultural values; namely, group and universal authority, the affiliated groupings of virtues and values rightfully enter the picture.

     A radically new model of motivated behavior is currently called for, one that melds modern behavioral psychology with the long-standing traditions associated with value ethics: a trend encompassing the personal, group, universal, humanitarian, and transcendental realms of inquiry. This comprehensive fusion linking instinctual conditioning with moral philosophy permits the first grand unified synthesis of ethically-motivated behavior. The currently proposed motivation solution provides a grand-scale synthesis of the virtues and values in relation to behavioral principles. The specific details for such a dual achievement invoke the entire range of human culture: organized as a ten-level hierarchy of virtues and values comprising both authority and follower roles. Furthermore, this ascending moral hierarchy formally appeals to the schematic principles underlying Set Theory. Here the elementary concepts of the one, the many, and the absolute are reflected through the personal, group, and universal realms of authority and follower roles.

     Each conceptual level is further associated with its own unique complement of ethical/motivational terms. This master ten-level hierarchy of authority and follower roles is uniquely correlated to over two-hundred individual virtuous terms, as partially reproduced in the compact table below (including the preliminary behavioral antecedents).


Approach Rewards          Avoidance • Leniency

Solicitude Approval       Submission Blame                        

Glory Prudence                    Honor Justice

Providence Faith                   Liberty Hope

Grace Beauty                    Free-Will Truth

Tranquility Ecstasy              Equality Bliss


+ Reinforce   Appetite       Reinforce  Aversion

Desire Aspiration               Worry • Compliance

Dignity Temperance   Integrity Fortitude
Civility Charity             Austerity Decency
• Goodness      Equanimity • Wisdom
Love Joy                           Peace Harmony


The traditional ethical listings defined within this hierarchy all appear linked on an intuitive level, suggesting a clear sense of overall cohesiveness,

the complete breakdown of which will now be described.




The key conceptual innovation arises as a direct outcome of the fledgling science of Communication Theory, borrowing the crucial concept of the meta-perspective. It is defined as a higher-order perspective on a viewpoint held by another: schematically defined as “this is how I see you-seeing me.” The higher-order listings of virtues and values are collectively ordered as subsets within this hierarchy of meta-perspectives, each more abstract grouping building upon that which it supersedes. Take, for example, the cardinal virtues (prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude), the theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency), and the classical Greek values (beauty-truth-goodness-wisdom). Each of these traditional groupings is further subdivided into four subordinate terms permitting precise point-for-point stacking within the hierarchy of meta-perspectives. Additional listings of ethical terms are further be added into the mix: namely, the civil liberties (providence, liberty, civility, and austerity), the humanistic values (peace-love-tranquility-equality), the mystical values (ecstasy-bliss-joy-harmony), etc.

     This cohesive hierarchy of virtues, values, and ideals proves particularly comprehensive in scope, accounting for virtually every major ethical theme celebrated within the Western ethical tradition. It is easy to gain a sense of the trend towards increasing abstraction when scanning the individual columns from top to bottom. The traditional sequences of terms line up seamlessly within this hierarchy of meta-perspectives. Indeed, it proves exceedingly unlikely that this cohesive pattern of organization could have arisen solely by chance. Furthermore, this ethical hierarchy mirrors the ascending sequence of personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental realms within society as a whole: which (when specialized into both authority and follower roles) accounts for the full ten-level span of ethical hierarchy.

     The major groupings of virtues and values serve as the elementary foundation for the motivational matrix. This grand-scale unification of ethical principles necessarily argues for a radical reinterpretation of the organizational principles at issue. The key salient insight resides in viewing the individual as the rightful product of a diverse range of social and cultural influences. In addition to the most basic one-to-one style of per­sonal interaction, the individual is further incorporated into a broad range of group contexts (e.g., work, family, country, etc.), as well as some all-encompassing universal context. These individual contexts collectively summate into a unified ethical hierarchy consistent with the theoretical principles governing Set Theory. Set Theory remains in full agreement with the three-level model of the ethical hierarchy: with the unit set, the group set, and the universal set equating with the personal, group, and spiritual levels of authority, respectively.

     The concept of a three-level style of set hierarchy is actually noth­ing new, proposed centuries earlier by German philosopher, Emmanuel Kant. In his masterpiece, Critique of Pure Reason, Kant proposes a comprehensive system of conceptual categories he considers crucial to the formation of the human intellect. Most notable is the relevant category of quantity: which Kant further subdivides into the concepts of unity, plurality, and totality. Indeed, these three fundamental aspects equate to the notions of the one, the many, and the absolute: equivalent (in a human social sense) to the personal, group, and spiritual authority levels.

     This three-level style of social hierarchy, although appealing in its sim­plicity, differs from Set Theory in that interactions between individuals do not exist solely in a vacuum, but rather are specialized into authority and follower roles. For the personal realm, this amounts to the personal authority and personal follower roles, extending to the group realm as the group authority and group representative variations, culminating in terms of the spiritual authority and spiritual disciple roles. A brief description of each of these authority and follower perspectives is certainly in order here, clearly outlining the proposed grand-scale unification of virtues, values, and ideals.

     The most basic personal authority level refers to the one-to-one style of interaction occurring between individuals, much as typically encountered in one’s personal friendships. This personal interplay is further specialized into either authority or follower roles: exemplified in the case of the master craftsman who remains dependent upon the services of his faithful apprentice. A similar scenario also holds true with respect to the hero and his side­kick, or the celebrity and his straight-man. Here the authority and follower roles flexibly complement one another in terms of such an equitable balance of power. The authority figure formally depends upon the attentions of his follower (as much as the other way around), resulting in an equivalent balance of power with respect to the personal realm.

This elementary personal foundation, in turn, extends to the equally pervasive domain characterizing the group authority perspective. The group set surpasses the unit set in terms of its expansion to a multitude of elements (or class members) within a group-focused context. Personal concerns now become sub­ordinate to such a group power base, being that enough group followers remain to continue group authority whether or not any single individual chooses to desert. In a single stroke, the group authority rises well above any personal power struggles, an innovation exploited since ancient times as the well-established custom of tribal-based authority.

     Group authority, in turn, is susceptible to its own unique form of follower counter-maneuver: namely, that expressed by the group representative. The latter’s distinctive style of “strike” leverage is fully realized at this juncture, as wit­nessed in the modern-day trend towards collective bargaining. By organizing as a union collective, the rank-and-file nominates a shop steward to represent them in their negotiations with management. The group representative, in essence, reminds the group authority that the cooperation of the labor pool is crucial for main­taining the group status quo. Consequently, the group authority (in concert with the group representative) shares an equivalent balance of power within the group power realm.

      A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the spiritual authority level, although this sense of “spiritual” is restricted to the universal sense of the term implicit in Set Theory. The universal set clearly surpasses the multi­plicity of the group domain: in essence, the sum-totality of all such groups within the universal domain. The universal set represents the “group of all group sets,” a 3rd-order style of set-hierarchy (equivalent to the domain of all mankind). Indeed, whereas group authority surpasses the influence of the individual members, the spiritual authority figure similarly over­rules the strike power of any of its constituent groups, whereby claiming authority over the sum-total of mankind.

     It is true (in practice) that each of the world’s religions competes for the beliefs of the world’s faithful. In principle each religion vigilantly strives to convert all others, giving credence to the uni­versal sense of the term. This claim to universality is traditionally made binding through an appeal to God or a Messiah-figure, a sanction dating to the earliest civilizations. Here a king could inspire the loyalty of his troops (in the name of a god of war) far in excess of what he might claim as a mere mortal ruler.

     Taking this trend to the limit, even an authority role as abstract as the universal must (by definition) be susceptible to its own unique form of follower maneuver: e.g., that specified for the spir­itual disciple. As spokesman for the spiritual congregation, the spiritual disciple reminds the spiritual authority that the blessings of the faithful are crucial for maintaining the spiritual status quo. Witness the power of the spiritual disciple for influencing such diverse historical events as the Protestant Reformation, and even the very founding of Christianity.




In summary, the three-level ascending hierarchy of personal, group, and spiritual domains, when further specialized in terms of both authority and follower roles, provides the supreme conceptual framework for explaining the grand-scale unification of virtuous terms. This virtuous format is schematically depicted in Fig. 1, including the three-digit codes for each of the respective virtues, values, and ideals. This master schematic format (tentatively termed the motivational matrix) incor­porates each of the major virtuous classifications described to date (plus an equivalent number of new ones) for a grand total of ten levels, serving as the elementary foundation for the remainder of the book to follow.

     As the underlying captions serve to indicate, the uppermost three levels of this diagram are designated for the personal, group, and spiritual levels: accounting for the most basic groupings of virtues/ideals. The remaining lowermost two levels, in turn, introduce a pair of hitherto un-mentioned categories; namely, the humanitarian and transcendental domains, respectively. This additional sequence of authority levels are classified as uniquely abstract styles of power perspectives, whereby clearly surpassing the more basic organizational pattern previously established for the initial three levels. A brief description of these final two levels is definitely in order here, for the most abstract listings of virtues and values enter into these final two domains.

     Although the spiritual realm is clearly the maximum level of organization (in keeping with the traditions of Set Theory), this very sense of chronological time permits the introduction of the even more abstract conception of humanitarian authority. The great theoretical physicist, Albert Einstein defined time as the fourth dimension of the universe, making it fitting that the humanitarian role enters into consider­ation precisely at this 4th-order level within the ethical hierarchy. Humanit­arian authority transcends the spiritual variety by claiming to speak for all generations of mankind, not just the current one: experienced as past trad­itionalism and/or future potentiality. Its extreme degree of generality pre­cludes its identification within any singular social institution, rather incorporated into the spiritual (and often political) framework of society as a whole.

     This extreme sense of the power of abstraction (when considered in its own right) ultimately serves as the basis for one final innovation within the ethical hierarchy; namely, the crowning transcendental level of authority. Transcendental authority regains the upper hand by transcending the routine sense of con­creteness shared in common by all of the lower levels, an innovation accounting for many of the most abstract listings of virtues and values. The transcendental perspective enters freely into the realm of pure intuition and imagination, wherein forsaking the constraints of ordinary re­ality for the supreme and incontrovertible realm of pure abstraction. This transcendental domain (in concert with its humanitarian counterpart) is further specialized into both authority/follower roles for a grand total of four categories. In concert with the six respective level characterizing the


               110          111                              120          121                                                                

         Solicitude  Submissiveness         Approval    Leniency

               112          113                              122          123

             Desire     Worry                   Aspiration   Compliance           

              EGO STATES                    ALTER EGO STATES

           (Personal Authority)                   (Personal Follower)




               130          131                              140         141

              Glory     Honor                      Prudence     Justice

               132          133                              142         143

             Dignity    Integrity               Temperance    Fortitude


            (Group Authority)                 (Group Representative)




               150          151                              160         161                         

      Providence     Liberty                           Faith     Hope

               152          153                              162         163

             Civility     Austerity                      Charity    Decency


         (Spiritual Authority)                       (Spiritual Disciple)




               170          171                              180         181

              Grace     Free Will                     Beauty     Truth

               172          173                              182         183

    Magnanimity    Equanimity              Goodness    Wisdom


       (Humanitarian Authority)             (Humanitarian Follower)




               190          191                              100          101

      Tranquility     Equality                      Ecstasy      Bliss

               192          193                              102          103

               Love      Peace                             Joy       Harmony


      (Transcendental Authority)         (Transcendental Follower)




Figure  1  --  The Major Virtues, Values, and Ideals


personal, group, and spiritual roles, the master ten-level hierarchy emerges in full detail, as schematically depicted in Fig. 1.

      Although basically only an introductory chapter, a few general observations must necessarily be made with respect to this distinctive sche­matic format. The ten individual listings of virtues, values, and ideals are organized as dual-descending columns comprising five groupings each. The left-hand col­umn represents the hierarchy of authority roles, whereas the right side specifies the respective follower roles. This dual schematic format repre­sents the sum-totality of reciprocating interactions between the authority and follower roles, as the respective directional arrows further serve to indicate.

     The distinctive groupings of virtues and values represented for each individual level exhibit a unique range of distinguishing characteristics. Each listing is represented as a quartet-style of format, depicted as quadrants in a pseudo-Cartesian coordinate system. The more traditional groupings (such as the cardinal virtues) are already depicted as a four-part grouping, fitting quite nicely within the quartet-style format. Others listings (such as the theological virtues) have been supplemented beyond their traditional number in order to achieve the requisite quartet-style status. A number of other groupings are entirely new to the philosophical tradition, yet effectively respecting the quartet-style pattern of organization.

     Similar to the reciprocating pattern of authority and follower roles, the affiliated groupings of virtues, values, and ideals similarly mirror this ascending style of hierarchy. The most elementary personal nature of the ego and alter ego states further serve as the foundation for the even more abstract listings of virtuous terms to follow. This virtuous realm runs the entire gamut of human experience ranging from the instinctual to the sublime (and everything in between). A brief description of each of these individual moral groupings is definitely in order here, serving as a preliminary overview for the remaining detailed examination to follow.




The most rational initiation point for this comprehensive style analysis is certainly the personal level within the ethical hierarchy. According to Fig. 1, these dual categories are respectively listed as the ego states targeting the personal authority role (solicitousness, submissiveness, desire, and worry), as well as the alter ego states comprising the follower role (approval-leniency-aspiration-compliance). The behavioral overtones underlying these groupings make them tailor-made for incorporation into the personal power realm, whereby effectively specifying the interpersonal dynamics at issue here.

     Although only briefly outlined, this initial complement of ego and alter ego states, in turn, serves as the elementary foundation for the remaining listings of virtues, values, and ideals, as outlined in Fig. 1. Indeed, a general pattern of organization emerges from this schematic format; namely, the left-hand column is characterized by what are termed the authority ideals: read downwards as the personal ideals, civil liberties, ecumenical ideals, and humanistic values. The right-hand column of follower roles, in turn, specifies the related trend based upon the virtuous mode; namely, the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, classical Greek values, and mystical values. For sake of consistency, the initial authority trend will be examined first, followed by an equal­ly comprehensive treatment of the respective sequence of follower roles.




The first mentioned sequence of authority ideals begins at the group authority level with respect to the provisionally termed class of personal ideals (glory-honor-dignity-integrity). The personal des-ignition for this grouping might appear somewhat of a misnomer, although more properly viewed as ideals within a group sphere of influence. These personal ideals build directly upon the ego states previously described for the personal authority role, wherein accounting for the hybrid quality of the grouping. In this latter respect, the group authority gloriously acts solicitously or honorably acts submissively towards his personal follower figure. Similarly, he might dignifiedly act desirously or worrisomely act with integrity in terms of this dual pattern of organization.

      The personal ideals collectively derive from the classical Latin tradition, effectively highlighting the Roman’s fascination with the heroic themes. This group authority focus is primarily expressed in terms of the many symbolisms for royalty and nobility; as in the heraldic traditions of the circle of glory, the honor point, the cap of dignity, and the heraldic symbolisms for integrity. Guided by such lofty civic ideals, the group authority figure fittingly aspires to such noble principles befitting a leader of society.

      The next higher spiritual authority level rates a similar consideration indicative of its respective class of civil liberties (providence-liberty-civility-austerity). Each of these themes is prominently featured in the founding of the United States, as collect­ively celebrated in the precepts of the Declaration of Independence. This revolutionary document invokes divine authority as one of its central premises, celebrating the universal rights of man for overruling the tyrannical edicts of the English monarch, King George III. Although this designation of civil liberties might suggest somewhat of a political context, further examination reveals the deep spiritual foundations for these four basic themes. Indeed, each of these themes was traditionally worshipped as a classical deity in its own right; namely, Providentia, Libertas, Civitas, and Auster. In terms of this more advanced universal context, providence represents the spiritual counterpart of glory, whereas liberty makes a similar correspondence to honor. Furthermore, civility represents a spiritual refinement of dignity, whereas austerity denotes integrity from a universal perspective.

The universal prerequisites for spiritual authority role, in turn, serve as the foundation for the affiliated concept of humanitarian authority, an innovation firmly rooted within the concept of “historical” time. This enduring humanitarian focus is directly reflected in the abstract listing of ethical terms provisionally termed the ecumenical ideals (grace-free/will-magnanimity-equanimity). The enduring significance of this grouping certainly suggests a common range of perspectives; namely, timeless themes consistent with such a grand humanitarian perspective. Although closely affiliated with spiritual concerns, a more detailed examination clearly reveals a grand humanitarian focus: as reflected in the long tradition of ecumenical councils dealing with generational issues.

     This grouping enjoyed particular favor during the Protestant Reformation. Indeed, according to Martin Luther: “By grace are thee saved through faith.” This listing of ecumenical ideals adds a more enduring sense of historicity to the civil liberties previously described for the spiritual tradition. For example, grace imparts a more enduring humanitarian focus to providence, whereas free will provides a historical perspective to liberty. Similarly, the remaining ecumenical ideals of magnanimity and equanimity extend a similar humanitarian mindset to civility and austerity.

     The crowning transcendental level ultimately rounds out the stepwise description of authority roles. This transcendental perspective formally appeals to the idealized realm of pure abstraction, in essence, transcending the more concrete nature of the preceding levels. The respective grouping of humanistic values (peace-love-tran-quility-equality) rightfully enter into consideration at this juncture: ideal values befitting such a lofty transcendental perspective. Each of these terms befits such a crowning level of abstraction, ideals attuned to realms wholly transcending routine experience. These values date to classical times, worshipped as abstract deities in their own right: namely, Pax (peace), Cupid (love), Quies (tranquility), and Aequitas (equality). These themes further served as the inspiration for many of the modern protest movements, such as in the New England Transcendentalists and the Peace Protest against the Vietnam War.




The completed description of the authority ideals, in turn, sets the stage for a discussion of the remaining sequence of follower roles. Whereas the authority hierarchy was based upon the ego states, the follower sequence alternately targets the alter ego states. This pattern further extends to the well-established traditions of the cardinal virtues and theological virtues. These two basic categories of virtue have long enjoyed a distinguished place of honor in the Western ethical tradition. As their qualifiers serve to indicate, the theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency) encompass the spiritual disciple role, whereas the cardinal virtues (prudence-justice-temperance-fortitude), by default, target the group follower perspective.

     The latter cardinal virtues are collectively designated from the Latin cardos (hinge): based upon the belief that all of the higher virtues hinge upon these basic four. Consequently, the cardinal virtues exhibit distinct parallels to the more elementary class of alter ego states; namely, prudent-approval, just-leniency, a temperate sense of aspiration, and compliant-fortitude. This enduring tradition of cardinal virtues figures prominently in the writings of the Greek philosopher Plato, particularly his fanciful dialogue, The Republic. These cardinal virtues provide an effective focal point within the dialogue, promoted as ideal codes of conduct befitting Plato’s conception of the Greek city-state.

      The even more advanced listing of theological virtues (faith-hope-charity-decency), in turn, builds upon their more elementary foundation within the cardinal virtues. Church theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas, viewed the theological virtues as divinely inspired; in direct contrast to the more elementary nature of the cardinal virtues, the latter of which were more widely regarded as natural social predispositions. Befitting their exalted moral status, the theological virtues remain an enduring theme in New Testament scripture, particularly celebrated by St. Paul as supreme moral principles governing virtuous conduct.

     Although the formal designation of theological originally applied only to the first basic three terms, the addition of the fourth related theme of decency effectively modifies this grouping into a format consistent with the quartet-style of hierarchy. This shortfall in the traditional complement of terms appears to account for the great theoretical insight that was missed down through the ages; namely, the theological virtues represent the higher spiritual analogues of the subordinate class of cardinal virtues (just as the latter are based within the alter ego states). Here one can acknowledge the prudent-faith or lenient-hope for justice professed by the spiritual disciple figure, in addition to the temperate sense of the charitableness and fortitudinous sense of decency germane to the discussion.

     The completed description of the group and spiritual levels, in turn, extends to a humanitarian focus with respect to the representative member of humanity role. More properly termed the philosopher’s maneuver, it invokes the prestige of speaking for all generations of mankind (not just the current one). In essence, the representative member of humanity reminds the humanitarian authority figure of his formal sanction from humanity, lest he lose prestige in such matters. The humanitarian authority perspective is essentially seen as more of a policy-making strategy than any immediate style of power perspective. The humanitarian follower, in turn, retains the option of rejecting humanitarian policy; hence, maintaining an essentially equivalent balance of power.

     The enduring grouping of classical Greek values (beauty-truth-goodness-wisdom) rightfully enters into consideration here, the major groupings of virtues already accounted for at the lower levels. This alternate focus on values invokes precisely such a humanitarian focus, the more immediate sense of virtue now advancing to the more timeless quality of value. Indeed, the classical Greek values date to the most ancient of times, celebrated by Plato as pure forms or essences that transcend the variability of the natural world. Each of these values was worshiped as an abstract deity in its own right; namely, Venus (beauty), Veritas (truth), Bonus Eventus (goodness), and Sapientia (wisdom). This classical tradition of value, in turn, fulfills the trend previously established with respect to the cardinal and theological virtues: namely, the beauteous-faith or just-hope for the truth, as well as the charitable sense of goodness and decent sense of wisdom characterizing the overall span of the humanitarian follower role.

     Even an authority level as abstract as the transcendental must (by definition) be invested with its own unique form of follower counter-maneuver, in this case, that specified for the transcendental follower role. Despite this extreme level of abstraction, it still proves possible to distinguish a respective listing of mystical values (ecstasy-bliss-joy-harmony). Although a formal description of this grouping of terms is scarcely warranted at this juncture, suffice it to say they encompass the enigmatic realm of religious mysticism tuned to realms wholly transcending ordinary experience. Although this crowning mystical level effectively closes out the nameable domain of the ethical hierarchy, it still proves possible to postulate the existence of a supernatural extension to the ascending hierarchy of terms: a topic best reserved for a more detailed examination of mysticism contained in Chapter 6.




In conclusion, the completed cursory examination of the ten-level hierarchy of virtuous terms aimed to provide a suitably comprehensive overview of virtuous realm, a mere glimpse at the more detailed examination to follow. At the heart of this system lies the unified ethical hierarchy depicted in Fig. 1, a reciprocating confluence of authority and follower roles spanning the personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental realms. In tribute to this dramatic scope, this new conceptual paradigm is respectively termed the motivational matrix, in direct analogy to the semantic style of linguistic matrix that it represents. This ascending hierarchy of authority and follower roles emerges as a direct outcome of the principles governing Set Theory. The truest value for this system derives from the respective listings of virtues, values, and ideals, intriguing in their quartet-style pattern of organization.

     This schematic pattern reflects the overarching sense of cohesiveness underlying the individual virtuous terms, as representative of the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, and classical Greek values. As depicted in Fig. 1, in the left-hand column of terms specify the authority roles. The first quadrant lists the ascending sequence of solicitousness, glory, providence, grace, and tranquility. All five terms share an immediately-active focus based upon the acknowledgement of past notable achievements. The same quadrant within the right-hand column of follower roles yields the related sequence of approval-prudence-faith-beauty-ecstasy: themes that directly reciprocate the authority roles through the perspective of the follower figure.

     A similar pattern further holds true with respect to the upper (right-hand) quadrants depicted in Fig. 1. The respective authority roles lead to the sequence of submissiveness-honor-liberty-freewill-equality: themes all sharing an active focus although now specifying a more submissive perspective. The remaining follower trend (leniency-justice-hope-truth-bliss) further verifies this reciprocating pattern, a sequence mirroring that based on approval with the exception that leniency is now called into focus. Indeed, it proves particularly amazing that these distinctive ethical trends should exist at all, each lining up so perfectly within its respective quadrant of the virtuous hierarchy. This grand scale organization is certainly a major selling point, the perfect symmetry and cohesiveness far too intricate to have arisen solely by chance. Indeed, these ten virtuous groupings actually prove to be just a basic skeleton framework for a much broader system of communication covering the entire range of emotionally-charged language in general: an issue clearly warranting further such overarching consideration.




This grand-scale pattern of organization for the main ethical terms proves a fitting launch-point for applications relating to world peace and harmony. The distinctive listings of virtues and values are amenable to widespread acceptance by the world community, their classical and contemporary overtones serving as the foundation for many of our most prominent political and cultural institutions.

     For instance, the legal system clearly celebrates the traditions of the cardinal virtues, the enduring theme of jurisprudence directly deriving from this classical arrangement of terms. The Declaration of Independence further celebrates the listing of civil liberties through an appeal to the universal rights of man, as suggested in the authority ideals of providence and liberty. The world economy is similarly based upon cooperation on an international level, as exemplified in an honorable insistence on fair business dealings, as well as integrity with respect to mutually-equitable commercial trade.

     This highly interdependent system of global economic cooperation remains entirely untenable without such enduring virtuous principles that serve as a restraint on unbridled western capitalism, particularly such as that which occurred during the recent global economic downturn. This enduring humanitarian focus celebrates more long-term plans for a stable global infrastructure, a lesson seemingly lost on the droves of speculators that sacrificed economic stability on the altar of short-term financial gains.

     Such long-term goals similarly prove applicable in relation to the career politician, an office that often appears similarly shortsighted in terms of partisan politics and a self-serving focus on reelection, all the while delaying critical action relating to budgetary responsibility. This move towards resurrecting traditional value ethics proves crucial towards reining-in the free exercise of short-sighted capitalist impulses. Indeed, many social institutions (whether legal, political, or religious) could gain substantially from the dramatic new insights contained within the newly devised hierarchy of virtuous terms. This cohesive ethical foundation further serves as the major conceptual framework for applications relating to the darker realm of ethical inquiry: including novel inroads towards avoiding the vices of defect, as well as an enhanced comprehension of the motives underlying criminality and international terrorism. This grand-scale ethical synthesis has entered the world scene at perhaps its darkest hour of need, a glimmer of hope for those that might seek to launch such a versatile innovation into action.




Although a preferential focus on the virtues is certainly understandable, the virtuous mode can scarcely exist solely in a vacuum. The truest applications arise precisely from such a moral contrast with the related realm of the vices (where virtue and vice contrast with one another). Indeed, for every virtue there necessarily exists a corresponding antonym (or vice): namely, love vs. hate, peace vs. war, good vs. evil, etc. The corresponding vices of defect represent the chief moral opposites for their respective virtuous counterparts, whereby providing a balanced sense of symmetry across the unified ethical hierarchy. The ten predicted categories for the vices of defect are arrayed in ten-level hierarchy similar to the pattern previously established for the virtuous mode, depicted in the compact diagram below and also in Fig. 9B of Chapter 9.

no Solicit.- no Reward   no Submiss.- no Leniency
Laziness • Treachery       Negligence • Vindictive.

Infamy • Insurgency         Dishonor • Vengeance

Prodigality • Betrayal                 Slavery • Despair

Wrath • Ugliness                    Tyranny • Hypocrisy
Anger • Abomination            Prejudice • Perdition


Punish. no Appetite           Punish. • no Aversion

Apathy • Spite                       Indifference • Malice

Foolishness Gluttony          Caprice Cowardice
Avarice               Cruelty Antagonism
Evil                Persecution Cunning
Iniquity             Belligerence Turpitude


This distinct style of ethical contrast allows negative transactions to be analyzed in terms of their potential for conversion into positive ones (and vice versa). The resultant ten-part categories for the vices of defect includes the ecumenical vices (wrath, tyranny, persecution, and oppression), the moralistic vices (evil, cunning, ugliness, and hypocrisy), and the humanistic vices (anger, hatred, prejudice, and belligerence), etc.; groupings that prove particularly significant for outlining this darker realm of the vices.




The vices of defect, in turn, can scarcely claim to be all-inclusive by any measure. Indeed, only half of the Seven Deadly Sins are formally accounted for in terms of the vices of defect: where pride, envy, and covetousness defy incorporation into the established domain of defect. This anomaly is fortunately explained through aid of an additional class of vices known since ancient times as the vices of excess. Aristotle first described this dual pattern relating to the vices. The vices of defect directly contrast in relation to the vices of excess, the latter defined as that range of extremes in relation to the virtuous mode. Accordingly, Aristotle viewed the virtuous mode as a system of mean values (or norms) interposed between the vices of defect and vices of excess.

     For instance, Aristotle cites the example of the virtue of courage. It represents the mean-range of virtue interposed between the corresponding vice of defect (cowardice) and its excessive counterpart in foolhardiness. Consequently, virtue represents the middle-ground between defect and excess, favoring moderation insofar as choosing a balance between this dual arrangement of the vices. Indeed, it ultimately proves feasible to devise an entire ten-level hierarchy for the vices of excess, mirroring point-for-point the pattern previously established with respect to the virtuous mode: although now extending to excessive qualities such as vanity, jealousy, shame, etc.


Pride Flattery                            Shame • Criticism

Vanity • Adulation                Humiliation • Ridicule

Conceit • Patronization         Mortification • Scorn

Pretention • Obsequious         Anguish • Mockery

Sanctimony • Sycophancy  Tribulation• Cynicism


Envy • Impudence                   Disdain • Insolence

Jealousy • Arrogance            Contempt • Audacity

Covetous.   Impetuosity     Reproach • Rashness

Longing • Presumption            Chagrin • Boldness

Affectation • Smugness    Bitterness • Harshness


Curiously, the three-way pattern of specialization implied in Aristotle’s Theory of the Mean fails to distinguish any parallel complement of extremes with respect to the vices of defect (similar to that specified for the virtuous mode). This glaring lack of an even sense of symmetry fortunately is remedied through the introduction of an entirely new class of ethical terms: a terminology provisionally termed the realm of hyperviolence. This new category is formally distinguished from the more routine realm of defect primarily in terms of the extremes by which it is expressed.

     Herein lies the formal prototype for the realm of hyperviolence; namely, that range of excess targeting the vices of defect. The fact that Aristotle fails to distinguish this additional conceptual category within his Theory of the Mean attests to the classical warrior ideal, where victory was to be achieved at any cost. The terminology for this extreme realm of hyperviolence scarcely enjoys the pedigree or tradition of the other listings of vices, although a complete listing of the provisional categories for hyperviolence is schematically depicted in the compact diagram immediately below, and also Fig. 18A of Chapter 18.


Indolence • Mutiny               Dereliction • Reprisal
Notoriety • Rebellious.
     Ignobility • Retribution
Licentiousness • Treason    Savagery • Hopeless.

Fury • Hideousness           Despotism • Mendacity
Madness • Horror                              Bigotry • Ruin


Languor Grudgingness     Callous. Malignancy
Voracity        Petulance Cravenness
Greed              Hostility Contentious.
Brutality • Heinousness      Barbarism • Ruthless.
Viciousness Balefulness       Atrocity Fiendish.


This arrangement is similar in form and function to that previously established for the vices of defect. In keeping with its somewhat infrequent occurrence in society as a whole, any formal terminology with respect to the realm of hyperviolence must necessarily rely upon the wealth of case histories from the annals of violent crime relating to criminal profiling.





In summary, the formal additional of the realm of hyperviolence results in a more fully balanced symmetry relating to the ethical hierarchy. These four basic ethical categories: e.g., the virtues, the vices of defect, the vices of excess, and hyperviolence collectively account for the routine range of emotionally-charged language in general; as formally depicted in the master schematic diagram to follow. This four-part diagram is organized around the novel concept of the neutrality status, a neutral point of entry within the system and the default status from which all new relationships are formed. This neutrality status is defined as that benign sense of neglect we express towards strangers on the street: contacts that pose no meaningful sense of relationship yet do not pose any impending sense of harm.


      (Excessive Virtue)


   (Virtuous Mode)






   (Absence of Virtue)



       (Excessive Defect)


Every new relationship (by definition) stems directly from this zone of neutrality status, a range of potentiality that extends to the realm of the virtues, or alternately into the domain of defect/excess. This moral divergence is schematically depicted as the dual arrangement of terms immediately flanking the zone of neutrality. This pair of conflicting options represents an ethical “fork in the road,” representing the basic core nucleus for the system. Most relationships are resolved through recourse to one option or the other (either virtue or defect), the basic thoroughfare for the communicational dynamic.

     This dual interpretation can scarcely claim to be the total picture, for the parallel realm of excess lurks along the more extreme boundaries of the core nucleus. For the virtuous realm, this corresponds to the related realm of the vices of excess. Furthermore, the vices of defect alternately grade-over into the newly proposed realm of hyperviolence. These latter two categories represent the figurative “fast lanes” of the relationship superhighway; namely, fringe areas exaggerated to the point of crossing over into the range of excess. Fortunately, such forays into the realm of excess are typically somewhat limited, the enduring sense of stability within the social dynamic effectively serving to diminish the effects of such drastic mood swings and maintain a more stable emotional disposition.





In agreement with the considerable degree of detail associated to the ten-level ethical hierarchy, the remaining chapters are subdivided into four major sub-headings. The remainder of the current section is devoted exclusively to the virtuous realm; namely, the major groupings of virtues, values, and ideals representing the cardinal virtues, theological virtues, classical Greek values, etc. This initial Part I is further subdivided into eight separate chapters representing the personal, group, spiritual, humanitarian, and transcendental levels within the ethical hierarchy; as well as examining the accessory virtues and general unifying themes. In Part II Aristotle’s enduring classifications of the vices of defect are further described. This section respectively comprises six individual chapters (9 through 14), whereby reflecting the ascending sequence of authority levels within the hierarchy of defect.

     This initial range of themes is further expanded in Part III with respect to the affiliated domain of excess, defined as that range of extremes targeting the virtuous mode. The realm of excess is further subdivided into three separate chapters collectively specifying the entire range for the vices of excess (as well as a number of accessory issues). The remaining chapters 18 and 19, in turn, examine the realm of hyperviolence: a new ethical category defined as that range of excess with respect to the vices of defect.

     In terms a final ethical overview, the remaining Part IV enters into a description of the global applications for the master linguistic matrix. Chapter 20 outlines avenues for further research and development, as well as intriguing modifications relating to the great literary traditions from around the world. Chapter 21, in turn, proposes improvements to the global economic mindset in terms of international cooperation. With the ongoing concerns over global terrorism, this new technology proves particularly effective towards aiming to ameliorate the effects of such misguided perspectives.

     Perhaps the most dramatic potential applications are detailed in Chapter 22 with respect to an ethical simulation of artificial intelligence, the basis for two US patents (now expired and in the public domain). This novel innovation employs the schematic coding system as an aid for programming of complex sequences of ethical parameters. Through the aid of information technology, the task of detecting and cataloguing ethical behavior is greatly simplified, eventually permitting a more effective range of global mediation across an international sphere of influence. Indeed, an intriguing discussion of applications relating to the realm of the neurosciences is included in the supplementary Appendix A, whereby further advancing frontiers towards promoting global peace and harmony within a purely scientific and reproducible sphere of inquiry.

     The following chapter launches this grand-scale undertaking in terms of a detailed examination of the personal authority and follower roles targeting the virtuous realm. Indeed, it is precisely at this most basic level that the technical rationale behind the quartet-style organization of ethical terms is finally addressed, ultimately explained in terms of the behavioral terminology of operant conditioning. The latter field of behavioral psychology is devoted to the study of instinctual types of goal-seeking behavior, an aspect highly suggestive of the more abstract focus of the virtues, values, and ideals.

     The father of modern behaviorism, B. F. Skinner, proposed a parallel correlation of behavioral and ethical principles in his quest for an overarching Technology of Behavior. In his masterpiece, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971), Skinner examines the behavioral correlates for a broad range of ethical terms (such as freedom and dignity), although to a limited degree of precision. Through the aid of the unified ethical hierarchy, however, this motivational style of analysis can be carried to its logical conclusion, incorporating virtually every major ethical term within the Western tradition. Indeed, it proves particularly crucial to view the ascending hierarchy of virtues and values as based entirely within behavioral terminology, as suggested in the elementary nature of the ego and alter ego states. The science of behaviorism, therefore, serves as the rational launch-point for any such detailed motivational analysis beginning with the detailed chapter to follow. A more detailed examination of the behavioral movement is definitely in order at this juncture, for herein lie the keys to outlining the instinctual foundations for the entire ten-level virtuous hierarchy.

     This solid conceptual grounding (within a secular, scientific foundation) fortuitously avoids offending the sensibilities of any singular world religion or culture in the process, celebrating the commonalties embraced by ethical traditions from around the world. Granted the world’s religions have enjoyed considerable success in promoting a virtuous lifestyle with origins vastly predating our modern technological age. For the vast majority of recorded history world religions have peacefully co-existed, although varying degrees of religious fanaticism have periodically stoked conflict amongst cultures. With the advent of our modern age of high technology, it would appear that humanity can no longer afford such a dramatic clash of cultures that extend to fanatical terrorism on a global scale. The newly proposed scientifically-based system of planetary ethics holds the greatest potential in this regard for overcoming the considerable threats to diminishing global peace and harmony.