Where Ethics and Genius Meet (...Collide?)

For the sake of furthering our conversation to perhaps another level, maybe we can agree, momentarily at least, on several definition of terms that come from the combined comments of everyone participating thus far (realizing, as anonymous said, that words are not adaquate to describe what is essentially indescribable [i.e. "the map is not the territory"]):

Ego: our sense of separate idendity, that which sees ourselves as separate from the whole, something which is neither good nor bad, per se, but that which, when allowed to run the show, tends to do so with the shortsightedness understandably attributable to the lack of total perspective allowable if, (and I'm trusting at some level this total perspective is possible -- though perhaps "god-like") one were able to see the "All in All" -- including the past, present, and future ripple effects and implications connected to our actions."

As was mentioned by annonymous --

Happiness: a feeling or sense we experience (recognizing that the ego may also be that which defines and seeks "happiness" based on its own needs and expectations, which are again, limited).

I'd like to also suggest that the ego, when operating in its more useful position of not driving the bus, but serving as a helpful resource whose job it is to keep the organism it is supposed to serve alive (as opposed to attempting to keep itself alive, at times at the expense of the organism and others).

This doesn't mean that happiness is not a valuable human experience or emotion, but more simply that it is a state of mind that may be possible without necessarily taking the "Whole" into account. (For some reason -- the word "joy" seems to be a word that to me takes on a more permanent sensibility and suggest the emotion that comes from a more holistic understanding.)

Genius: the collective wisdom, knowledge, creativity, information, data, etc., accessible via conscious volition and, at times, through unconscious volition or as a consequence of steps or processes which we may have undertaken, which have some sort of cumulative affect (as is in profound insights, creative solutions, musical masterpieces, etc. which seemed to "drop in" out of nowhere).

So this definition suggests that genius itself is the data, wisdom, etc. in its pure form (not yet applied) -- though the application itself may also be laden with genius. Also, to Annonymous' point, I'd add that there may be a natural flow to genius that we access when we are simply "being" (and in such instances, to the extent that our natural flow is transcendent to the doings of our ego, genius and its application would be much more seamless).

The Application of Genius: which would be limited... or one might say "filtered" or "shaded" to the extent to which the ego is operating the implementation control panel (and to the inverse extent to which the ego realizes its inherent limitations and successfully attempts to the degree possible, to get out of the way and allow the "Whole" to manifest this slice of collective "a-ha" or "creation" -- as unfettered as possible).

It's worth noting, however, that part of what we deem as the beauty of any creation or act of genius may, in fact, be the very coloration or touches of "imperfection [i.e. lack of "wholeness"]) brought on by the nature of the information being brought into this dimension by a human or other being of nature [I've seen animals access genius as well and come up with a remarkable series of adaptive mechanisms or extensions of themselves that one might call "art," "creativity," innovation," and so on -- so I'm postulating that genius is not limited to the human species]).

As you can see, I'm hoping it helpful to distinguish between "genius" (which may be transcendent to the ordinary self) and the "non-transcendent application of genius" (which, as long as we're in human form, will to varying degrees, involve the participation of our ego -- which often seeks it's own temporary happiness or satisfaction).

I also want to acknowledge that by using words and characterizing some acts as transcendant or limited and others as not, some manifestations of genius and productive and some as not, etc. we are by nature talking in terms of the relative state (and that we may, in reality, be desribing "genius" as that which is accessible and in fact part of or a manifestation of the Absolute -- to use the Zen termonology -- and the non-transcendant, or ego infused application of genius as the Absolute State as applied by and later valued or judged by the Relative State).

Now, with those clearly less than perfect, but hopefully temporarily adaquate, definitions in mind (since, again, they are an attempted synthesis of everyone's comments), let's move on to that tricky question of the ethics and genius. I'm going to drop a couple of questions into the mix... ones which I am truly pondering (as opposed to rhetorically launching)... and hope others might share some insight regarding them:

Are not ethics, by nature, relative to each person (and therefore sourced by ego)? (This may also lead to that phenomenon of satisfying agreement that we experience when we have enough overlap with another in our ethical blueprints to feel that sense of shared joy we at times experience upon finding one who sees the world the way we do -- this then becomes the basis of those we consider "close" to us perhaps?)

Or is there something (or some perspective or wisdom itself) beyond ethics (and thus possibly sourced by genius -- or the whole) which possibly enables a more holisitically balanced manifestation of genius? One which, upon our later examination or judgement, from our viewpoint (as humans and as ones whom, to varying degrees, may have our egos in their more productive role -- or not), appears to be more or less valuable to us (and to those people, things, etc. which matter to us -- i.e our values)? I'd love your thoughts on these somewhat clumsily stated questions (which may in and of themselves, invoke more questions, but nonetheless... let the process begin).

P.S. Remember to click on "Links to this Post" to see the comments in the body of a blog topic or click on "Comments" to see the comments in a pop-up window.