‘Balanced Incorporationism of Principles’ is a philosophical world view that is deep, yet simple enough to understand and apply. It is a view that brings enlightenment by incorporating principles that a person already believes. The view allows a person to find a greater balance to all of his or her principles. This philosophy and world view gives a person freedom of choice, discovery, discernment, and a way to test philosophies, principles, belief systems, and statements made and believed by self or others.  

Philosophy means the love of knowledge; philo translates into love, and sophy translates into knowledge. And since philosophy is the love of knowledge I will try not to throw anything out, for who throws out those things that one loves? That is, if they are a true philosopher.

 With that being said, let’s start out with a fundamental truth we all believe. In one way or another we all believe in the principle of right and wrong, good and evil, or better and worse; this belief system is a principle and it is called the first principle of judgment. This is the principle we use to categorize and separate things into understandable differences. We uses it everyday to decide if we are having a good or a bad day, if we like this person’s cooking, is this person going to help or hinder me, is this belief system a good system to believe or not worth the time of day. Even if you disagree with this principle, you acknowledge by your judgment that this principle is correct.
 
In judging everything, we judge peoples actions. This is the second principle, which is morality. We think, ‘That person is kind so that person is a good person, or that person is a murderer so that person is a bad person.’
 
In defining why they are good or bad, we start defining morality. When we say a person is kind and therefore good, we are saying that kindness is good. We have judged according to the principle of kindness. The principle of kindness is one of the subsections of the principle of morality. When we reference the term murder, we acknowledge the principle of taking a life outside of principles is bad. What I mean by this is that if a police officer or soldier takes a life in the line of duty, according to all the right criteria, this person is not a murderer, even if they did kill. Now, if a man for selfish reasons, kills another person, we call this person a murderer. The police officer and the soldier killed according to the principles set out by the authorities above them, whereas the murderer did not. The murder missed principles such as the authorized right to kill, the goodwill to the other person, the rule of law, mercy, and maybe a whole list of other principles. So, what we call bad is the absence of good.  You could say that we now have good and the absence of good, or principles and the absence of principles.
 
Like the saying, “He was a man without principles.” When a person lacks principles they are like called all kinds of names, like cheat, swindler, liar, murderer, thief and etcetera. These are terms that acknowledge that they did some actions that lacked certain principles.
 
Principles are so good that we will put people to death because they lack principles. Even more that that we will risk other humans lives, that live up to principles, to get rid of people who lack principles. During World War Two we sacrificed thousands and thousands of good men to get rid of Hitler from this world. This shows that principles are greater that any one person. That also shows that in the cosmic order of things mankind is underneath the power of principles. Reaffirming that principles are above people, a person might even surrender their own life unto starvation, suffering, and/or death because of a principle they believed in.
 
Though principles are in one sense over humanity; they are also under humanity and are its foundation. Your principles are the foundation of the house your life is built on.
   
What types of principles are we talking about?
 
All of them! Yes, that is a lot. But, these principles can be sorted into categories, and these are put in no specific order; here are some of the puzzle pieces of truth that are being collected; Science, Morality, Sociology, Logic, Time, and etcetera.
 
We know that there are principles in Science that are true; like gravity, the knowledge of chemical elements, names and species of plants and animals, not the theory of evolution but the principle of evolving; that things evolve.
 
We may not say that morality is a true principle, but when one of our family members is killed we call out for justice from the wrong. With calling a thing ‘wrong’ we acknowledge and reaffirm that morality is a principle that we all know about. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, ‘We hold these truths to be self evident.’ Therefore morality, is a truth that is part of ‘Balanced Incorporationism of Principles,’ yet it does not include all personal belief systems on morality
 
We know that time exists and that it affects our daily lives. So, time is a part of Balanced Incorporationism. ‘Change’ is also a truth that we see exists every; the seasons change from one to the next, the day goes to night, and things grow and then die. Change is also a truth along with growth and death.
 
The nice thing about Balanced Incorporationism is that if you find a principle that is not included it can be added to the scheme of things. It can be added to your world view. 
 
Why Balanced Incorporation of Principles?
 
The purpose of Balanced Incorporation of Principles is to give a world view to a person so that they can explore and apply belief systems across their whole life, so they have a perspective to be continuous in all that they do. I’ve noticed the negative of continuousness in my own life, when my work has asked me to do one thing and all of a sudden my subconscious arises and I find I have a moral conflict arising in my mind and I may or may not know why. Balanced Incorporation of Principles gives a frame work for a person to analyze the principles that are going on, and help to find a principle, or set of principles, that they can stand on to make a decision. Though ten different people with the same issue may come up with ten different ways to handle it according to what principles they apply the most emphasis.
 
The way of Balanced Incorporationism is for a person to collect as many principles as they believe, and understand, and act according to all those principles at the same time, versus being compartmentalized. Balanced Incorporationalism hopefully will give people insights into what a person consciously and unconsciously believes. 
  
Puzzle Pieces of Morality
 
Humanity is a social species and therefore 'society' is a principle of Balanced Incorporationism. Since morality is a principle, the principle of the social good is also a principle. The subsections of morality include such areas as honor, grace, judgment, justice, mercy, goodness, integrity, purity, respect, truthfulness, gentleness, peacefulness, and etcetera.
 
We have already seen that justice is a principle that one can call on; it is a universal truth. Yet, when we call on justice we acknowledge that morality is a truth that someone did not keep. Purity is also a truth, for who wants contaminated milk to drink. So, purity is the quality of not being corrupted with something else; it is pure.
 
We all know that we are not perfect (well probably most of us), and so when the cop stops us for a traffic violation we call out to the principle of mercy. So, mercy is a principle that reasons that no one is perfect; that we are not all punished; so please allow me not to be punished fairly for my lack of obedience to the traffic laws. This also points out that fairness is a principle. There are many aspects of morality and these are just a few of them.
 
Now, what Balanced Incorporationism says is that in truth all of these principles balance each other out. In society, if every offence that anyone did was just given mercy, then a killer could keep on killing until he got caught, and then ask for mercy, and would be given mercy and set free a to kill again. Judgment balances mercy, so that the balance of society does not get out of balance too far. 
 
Truthfulness balances all these with the principle that if a person is not the killer but is charged with the killing, truth steps in and says this person is innocent (aka pure), so they need neither justice or mercy.
 
Honor is also in the midst of that situation by respecting the Judge, the lawyers (I know, I know, we lack that part in our society), the jury, the witnesses, and the defendant.
 
Society applies all these principles everyday. Let’s look at a scientist that brings out new information. We question the hypothesis and say, “Is the data pure or corrupt? Did they do their study in an ethical (moral) way?” Were they honest or are they lying about the data?” If the study was done well, but a young scientist makes a small unintentional error, we have mercy by saying, “Well he is young yet; he will do better.” We have mercy on him, because we know that he will learn; he will evolve. But, if everything checks out good, we honor him with congratulations, thanks, recognition, and awards.
 
In science there are truths such as mathematics, social sciences, logic, philosophy, economics, accounting, and etcetera. “Accounting?” you may say. Yes, accounting. Look at the principle of double entry. What double entry in accounting basically says that if you add something to one side of the equation you must add the equal amount to the other side; as my wife proposed the saying, “both sides of the equation of wisdom must balance.” So, what Balanced Incorporation says is that everything in the world that we see as principles must be included on the other side of the equation of truth.
 
Most people look at the world as either this or that, either mercy or judgment, either black or white, either science or religion, but “Balanced Incorporationalism’ says there is black and white, plus the all the colors of the rainbow and x-ray, gamma rays, and whatever else might be a principle of truth is part of the theory of the Incorporationism.
 
The balance in ‘Balanced Incorporationalism’ does not mean all things carry the same weight. Just as we see in science that there are principles that hold greater weight than other principles. Just as in government, not all officials have the same authority. The President of the United States has a greater weight of authority then does the official that puts parking tickets on cars. So, certain principles are a subset of other principles just as honor is a subset of morality and so on.
 
Below is a story to help all of you that are right brained gain understanding, since the above was mostly all set in left brain descriptions.
 
The Philosophical Watch
 
The younger philosophers went to the sage to get his help and this is their discussion.
 
Philosophers: The ancient sages have left us pages and pages on this mechanism to understanding time, yet we are all so confused can you help us out sage?
 
Sage: Do you have all the pieces my young philosophers?
 
Philosophers: Yes we have science.
 
Sage: Do you have morality?
 
Philosophers: No, no we do not need morality.
 
Sage: Aren’t you concerned for the social good?
 
Philosophers: Oh, yes we are!
 
Sage: How can you be, if good is a moral principle?
 
Philosophers: What do you mean?
 
Sage: If you do not have the gear of morality how can you have the cog on that gear of social good?

Philosophers: I guess we need that, huh? Well, lets go back into the pages of time and pick that up. Ok, so we now have the gears of science and morality. Now will you put the watch together for us?
 
Sage: Do you have the gear of the authority?
 
Philosophers: No, we hate being told what to do, so we have rejected government?
 
Sage: Isn’t government a principle we see in everyday life?
 
Philosophers: Yeah, but we don’t need it, and have rejected it. 
 
Sage: That reminds me I am having a problem with my children maybe you can help me out?
 
Philosophers: Sure Sage.
 
Sage: I want my children to get their immunization shots, but they don’t want them. What should I do?
 
Philosophers: Well, you have to take them to the doctor and get their shots, you know Sage it is for the social good.
 
Sage: Yeah, but if I take them to the doctor anyway, they may not like me.
 
Philosophers: Yeah, but you have a responsibility to get them there because you are their parental authority.
 
Sage: Yeah, but you have rejected the gear of authority; therefore I can’t apply it to my children.
 
Philosophers: Oh man! He got us again. We will bring you the gear of authority. Here it is.
 
Sage: Now, I would like to ask you a question: Shouldn’t we fight against those who promote war.
 
Philosophers: Oh, most definitely!
 
Sage: Why do you say that?
 
Philosophers: Duhh, war is bad and so we must make war against it. 
 
Sage: So you say we should start a war to end the principle of war. If we start a war, are we not adding more war to the war that already exists?
 
Philosophers: So, are you saying that we should not let our opinions be known?
 
Sage: No, what I am alluding to is that the principle of war is the principle of overcoming, like all things this can be used for good or bad. Yet, the principle of getting our will and desires accomplished is the essences of war. Fighting no matter how small it is; is the sapling to the tree of war. War exists whether I am trying to get my children or spouse to do what I want, or two countries fighting against each other with ever increasing powerful weapons. War is a principle that exists in this world and so it needs to be incorporated into the watch of philosophy if we are going to understand the time; for it is one of the gears that makes this world tick.
 
Philosophers: But we hate war!
 
Sage: Your hatred is the seed of war. Do you hate when children go hungry?
 
Philosophers: Of course we do.
 
Sage: Have you ever supported a group that fights against poverty?
 
Philosophers: Yes
 
Sage: Is what you did wrong?
 
Philosophers: Of course not!
 
Sage: So, not all wars are evil.
 
Philosophers: Ummm… Well… I guess not.
 
Sage: So, war is, at this time a constant.
 
Philosophers: Ok, we will incorporate war into the watch.
 
Sage: So we now have the letters of science, morality, authority, war, can we now spell with four letters all the words of philosophy?
 
Philosophers: Huh?
 
Sage: Aren’t there more than four letters in the alphabet?
 
Philosophers: Well, yes.
 
Sage: So, therefore we need more pieces to assemble the watch, correct?
 
Philosophers: I guess, but what pieces will we need?
 
Sage: How about ritual?
 
Philosophers: Anything but rituals.
 
Sage: Are the numbers on the watch the actual essence of time itself or are they symbols that tell us what the time really is? Does the watch create time or is a watch a measurement of time?
 
Philosophers: It is a measurement of time.
 
Sage: So, rituals can be just a symbolic door way to tell us what one form of knowledge is.
 
Philosophers: What do you mean?
 
Sage: Well, during my time I have also had a hard time with rituals. Yet, when I meditated on the principle of ritual, I saw that rituals are just a teaching method to teach us and lead us into a truth. The ritual is not the truth itself, it is like the hands on a watch, they are symbols that tell us about a truth. Rituals can be set up by right brained people who are pictorial. They are like the posters of the alphabet in first grade with the picture of the apple for the letter ‘A’ , and the picture of the Bee for the letter ‘B.’ Yet rituals can be kinetic and pictorial teaching methods for those who learn easier that way.
 
Philosophers: Ahhh now we get it. So what else do we need?
 
Sage: There are main principles that are needed and they are……..
 
The Sage and the young Philosophers talked through the night. The young philosophers even brought up principles the Sage had not thought of. When morning came the young philosophers ask the sage to now put the watch together, but the Sage declined. 
 
Sage: Now that you have all the pieces, just look at all the pieces and then at the world and it will lead you into how all the pieces fit together.
 
Philosophers: But, we want you to build it for us.
 
Sage: So each of you wants me to design one watch that fits all? You thought I was a sage, who would want the same colored 'one watch fits all?' 
 
Philosophers: Yes, but we want them all to be the same.
 
Sage: Don’t worry; the principles are all the same. Even though they have a different color or style of watch than you, you will be able to tell if others’ watches are working by their actions. Are not all roses basically the same, yet each flower and petal is unique, and as it is said, variety is the spice of life. 
 
At this the philosophers departed. But, what did the philosophers do afterwards? Well let me know, for whatever your story is, that is the story of philosophers that continues down from the past and throughout the rest of the future of mankind. 

  
This is the end of the first chapter overview of ‘Balanced Incorporationism of Principles.’ The next chapter will be on ‘How Balanced Incorporationalism of Principles Relates to the Concept of G.’

(To Be Continued)

(Picture: Wikipedia Commons - Attribution: Michel Villeneuve)

If you benefitted from this article or post please consider voting by clicking on the vote button at the top right and/or leave a comment.

To enjoy the writings of this author: http://www.xomba.com/user/Wdzzz

Did you enjoy the post or article? Have you checked out Xomba? Would you like to be paid to post the same types of things, or other items? Get paid to write. Click the link below and sign up. It's FREE...no hidden expenses.
http://www.xomba.com/referral/777902dc