# Actual Freedom ~ Frequently Asked Questions Frequently Asked Questions ## Does Actualism Accept / Reject Ethics or Psychology?
| Does responsibility and seriousness come with being carefree?
| Do you live a moral life? If so, why? Would you lie, cheat and steal? Which morals are your own and which are seen to exist already? ... If there is no good or evil, right or wrong, why would you want to get rid of human sorrow?? That in itself is a value inferring that those things exist, are to be avoided, and should be eliminated.
| And does your freedom entail the total and complete erasure of the human consciousness that moves the common herd or just only the moral conditioning – the sense of right and wrong, good and evil?
| Does actualism reject the useful application of empirical wisdom such as ethics and psychology? And I mean empirical (proven results through the scientific method). I mean some very complex ethical issues in my Mental Health work require me to be able to reason Consequentially (i.e. Utilitarian, Situational Ethics), utilize ethical principles (Social Work Values, deontological principles), and have a virtue ethic (having pro-social habits – now actualism (and being in the moment with one’s senses/emotions/thought – which is a part of actualism but not exclusive to actualism) comes in here as it removes the ego/soul which of course has the pro-social benefit of altruism. Does actualism deny all this?
| Richard, as you have used LeDoux, perhaps this [General Sensate Focusing Technique] can be of service. (snip link). 1) The GSFT was a pointer that peace could be found out side of spirituality – thus a precursor to be being open to AF. 2) I have broke some habits with it: a) obsessive TV watching. b) smoking. c) overeating. c) and others of a more personal nature. 3) I have improved my emotional climate: a) I have reduced the intensity and frequency of ‘being angry’. b) I have reduced the intensity and frequency of anxiety. Perhaps his detailed instruction of how to sensately focus could be of use for a beginning actualist.
| Excellent science article on empathy which I found very relevant to my work. Also it aligns with near-actual caring: Attachment: Nautilus – Issue 35: Boundaries: How to Avoid Empathy Burnout [by Jamil Zaki; April 7, 2016; "Caregivers can benefit by understanding a patient’s pain without feeling it themselves"]. .... but not the last self-love bit which came out of the blue! [bracketed insert added]. ADDENDUM: Actually I’m seeing that the article for the most part doesn’t align with near-actual caring or naive intimacy. But it does advocate not taking on emotional contagion, pragmatism and boundaries – which I suppose are sensible real world ways of care-giving.
| One of the differences between you and me is that I am not against emotions. I think both you and K are wrong in this respect. I do not have to ignore my emotions. Why should you get rid of them, if the underlying principle is sound? Most people are completely ignorant about ethics, and questions pertaining to the distinction between good and evil. Not everybody is aware of the fact, that Ayn Rand has given an objective basis to ethics, and therefore for an objective distinction between good and evil.
| Did you follow gurus or shrinks?
Actual Freedom Homepage
Commonly Raised Objections – Index | Frequently Flogged Misconceptions – Index | Frequently Asked Questions – Index
Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless Design ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997- . All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity