Utilitarianism is the only viable system of morality

Thanks Pro for accommodating my error, it was a moral gesture. That is, it generated positive-feedback keeping the debate alive; for a debate is essentially a group, in this case, a group of two: Pro and Con. As I stated previously, the objective of morality is doing Right keeping a group alive. Pro took issue with Jefferson's term of “self-evident. ” An axiom is a premise so “self-evident” as to be accepted as true without controversy. From a logical point of view, the event of survival or death, success or failure, moral or immoral, in the pursuit of positive- or negative-feedback, respectively; when interfacing with nature, presents a self-contained system of binary outcomes. In the field of mathematics and logic, such a closed system of propositions brings into existence a proof. From a binary standpoint, notably, it would be impossible to take away any one of the Rights while leaving the other two intact, as all of the Rights are dependent on one another---Unalienable. Without Life, one cannot enjoy Liberty or pursue Happiness. Without Liberty, one lacks the freedom to take the path in the pursuit of survival, and therefore, unable to continue Life. Without the pursuit (energy flow) of events leading to survival (positive-feedback, Happiness) one cannot continue Life or enjoy Liberty. Because of their interdependency and tendency to wane simultaneously with various degrees of obstruction, the three Rights define a spectrum of positions. The binary positive end of the spectrum is a position of Life, Liberty, and Happiness (positive-feedback), while the negative end is a position of death, tyranny, and distress (negative-feedback). The Constructal Law video was simply a reference. Not “passing it [argument] off to another person. ” Pro stated, “. .. my opponent has provided some kind of semi-mystical, pseudo-scientific, techno-babble. ” Apparently Pro is struggling with a relatively new discovery in nature known as the Constructal Law. Pro should enjoy the learning experience of a new discovery, opening many doors, especially in the field of social sciences. Pro stated, “Utilitarianism is simply moral non-absolutism and consequentialism. ” Consequentialism = “whether an act is morally right depends only on consequences (as opposed to the circumstances or the intrinsic nature of the act or anything that happens before the act)” (. http://plato.stanford.edu...).My argument is, in general, a living-system's action, via its bio-program (Unalienable Rights) interfacing with nature, is biased towards positive-feedback (moral) as opposed to negative-feedback (immoral). Consequentialism has a limited scope because it excludes the “intrinsic nature of the act. ” For example, before the invention of the airplane, man historically exercised his Right of freedom in the pursuit of attempting to fly like a bird by attaching wings to his limbs, resulting in endless negative-feedback in death or failure. Over the ages man was only able to achieve his flight objectives when he morally complied with nature's Laws of Aerodynamics through positive-feedback, then humanity safely took to the sky. The “intrinsic nature” was morally complying with the Laws of Aerodynamics. The domain of morally complying with the Laws of Nature is the foundation to the fruits of technology, food production, and medicine, the stables of human existence throughout the world. These stables help make this world a better place to live by morally improving the standard of living by complying with the “intrinsic nature” or the “absolute nature” of the Laws of Nature. On the other hand, in social group formation, the action of “utilitarianism,” in the beginning, generates group-wide positive-feedback via “non-absolutism and consequentialism,” but over time, becomes the genesis of traditions, social values, beliefs, language, etc, the norms of society. These norms are tried and tested, and conservatively pass down from one generation to the next establishing its culture. A moral order guides an individual in the prudent exercise of judgment relative to those norms, going with the social flow minimizing civil resistance (Constructal Law). A moral individual in a civil society strives, albeit imperfectly, to be virtuous; that is, restrained, ethical, and honorable, respecting and embracing the Unalienable Rights of others relative to those tested norms. Ironically, through time the result of “utilitarianism” generates social norms which becomes the “absolute nature,” a deontology, of a Culture. Hence, the “absolute nature” of a culture often generates conflict between cultures, the seeds of war. This argument debunks the notion that “Utilitarianism is the only viable system of morality. ” Utilitarianism is one of many systems that generates social values via the agent of morality. For morality is a binary agent relative to life's Unalienable Rights interfacing with nature either animate or inanimate.