Imagine…

You are forced onto a shabby yacht with 99 other people. There are 40 life vests on board that can be undetectably worn beneath one's clothing. You are told that during your journey there is a reasonable chance, (due to inevitable stormy weather in which all hands are forced on deck), a number of you will fall overboard. If you fall overboard, there is no way to return to the yacht. You are told there has never been a journey in which no one fell overboard. You are told, (and you have seen it to be true on previous journeys), that fewer people fall overboard in stormy weather when all hands are on deck working together as one. It is also explained that each life vest is equipped with a sensor that when activated will alert Search and Rescue and pinpoint your location. You will be rescued and taken back to port to board another yacht. If you fall overboard without a life vest you have little choice but to make your way on your own to a (hopefully nearby) port, not knowing with certainty where that is or if they will even allow you to come to shore. Fortunately this sea contains sporadic shallows that aid you in your struggles; but still, some never find a port in the storm and are forever lost at sea; and a few are drowned. Many others do make it safely to a port knowing there are other journeys on other yachts to come. Very, very few of us are able to stay comfortable, safe and secure on dry land for any significant lengths of time.

When you board a yacht, before departure, you are taken into a small cabin on deck, one at a time, which is where each individual is either given a vest and told, “you deserve this,” or shown a vest and told “you have not earned this.” Sometimes this process of distribution makes sense; often it does not. Most passengers come out of the cabin stoic; not indicating if they received a vest or not. Everyone it seems wants everyone else to believe that they are one of the privileged who received a vest.

Typically there are a few making their first journey; they are positive and excited. Some others are experienced travelers who exude confidence and appear to be up to the challenge. Some appear to be tired and jaded. And some are wary and attentive. Regardless, acknowledged or not, all are afraid.

Each journey varies in length and time.

There are strict laws against taking another's life vest forcibly or otherwise. Punishment is harsh. The only legal way to gift a life vest is to someone who has fallen overboard. The decision must be witnessed and clearly interpreted as free will.

All passengers on your yacht are strangers to one another. Family and friends are traveling on other yachts. You have made plans with family and friends to meet at the next port.

In this circumstance as described in the paragraphs above…

• Not knowing with certainty the length of your journey, would you make any effort to truly befriend another passenger? Or would you actively hope for a casual acquaintance? Or would you maintain a stoic silence and a respectful distance?


• When a traveler falls overboard and flailing in the water admits to no life vest, if you were one of the privileged with a life vest, would you willingly remove it and toss it to the stranger to ease their struggles?


• If a group of passengers all with no life vests, recruited you to mutiny, (believing you were one of them), what would you do?


• On occasion, one or more passengers may become loud and smug, displaying their vest and hinting they have the answers and can help those with no vest. These blustering egos may also work to organize the passengers into an us and a them that cross lines of privilege. How would you react?


• In every port there are warehouses full of life vests. When asked why only 40 are allotted for each journey, the bureaucrats answer in bureaucratease. When asked why so many must struggle unnecessarily, the high priests answer in moralitease. When asked, “Is there a better way?” – the thinkers answer in realitease. How do you reconcile the Law with Goodness, Goodness with Truth, and Truth with the Law?

I want to respond to this last question.

Our Law is incompetent, inconsiderate, inequitable, injurious, inexplicable, and ultimately inconsequential. Goodness is self-evident, meaning evident in itself NOT as defined by a self or an ego. To make a Law in order to enforce or advance Goodness is an interpretation of Goodness, which is not Goodness. To make a law in order to deter (or decrease the frequency of) Badness may (or may not) have some merit. Too many of our Laws today allow for Badness in the name of Goodness. Where Goodness is self-evident, The Truth is unknowable, thus unattainable. Our truth (which is far from The Truth) is evolving, at different rates for different people, and at different rates for different groups of people. It is sad when one depends upon doctrine, policy and propaganda to determine their truth. We want to believe that our Law is framed by Goodness and reflects Truth, but in practice and approach the Law is incompetent, inconsiderate, inequitable, injurious, inexplicable, and ultimately inconsequential.

I believe at the end of my life I will not be judged according to man's laws, but rather according to Goodness and how hard I worked at pursuing Truth.