My further ponderation on conscience typed with one finger on my phone while holding a very restless Izzy

A while back there was a social media campaign against the word "retard". Brave participants of the campaign monitored live feed on Facebook and Twitter, and whenever someone used the r-word, they contacted them and politely communicated their disapproval. While I applaud everybody who was gutsy enough to participate and thus stand up against this disparaging slur, I was not convinced of the efficacy of the campaign. Not  because it takes a great deal of maturity and humility to admit one's fault and most people tend to become defensive or confrontational when challenged, but because the campaign targeted a symptom rather than the cause. Far be it from me to criticize this noble initiative, I'm sure there are some open minded people who as a result of the campaign will be more careful not to use the r-word in the future, but those who are sensitive enough to listen to a stranger's plead-tweet and consequently change their behaviors are not the ones who pose a real threat to the rights and dignity of disabled individuals. I believe if we really want to effect change, we need to target the thinking and the attitude behind the behavior and advocate for acceptance, tolerance, love and kindness. 

We live in a society where individualism and self-reliance are core values while there is much less emphasis on community, group interest or interconnectedness. A society where aggression, clever manipulation and harshness are considered strengths while kindness, selflessness and self-sacrificial love are regarded as weaknesses. It's a society where an "empowered woman" proudly proclaims to be a "mean bitch" and instead of the old-fashioned virtues of grace, class or self-effacement, displays an exaggerated sense of self-importance and entitlement. Even advertisements target this pervasive sense of entitlement, explicitly suggesting that you should pamper yourself and buy a certain product because  "you deserve it". The immense credit card debt that many people are slowly drowning in is a testament to a culture of indulgence and instant gratification. It's a culture where the pursuit of happiness is taken seriously: it's an inalienable right, included in the Declaration of Independence. By many people, happiness (a very vague notion in my opinion) is viewed as the ultimate purpose or the very meaning of one's existence, rather then a simple "side effect " resulting from living a meaningful life. We live in a society where individual achievement is celebrated but the value of being a faithful part of a system is overlooked. It's a society where violence, beauty and youth are glorified and if you become weak and vulnerable, or if you lack beauty or grow old, you will lose your worth. 

It's a hostile environment for the more vulnerable members of  our society, not a safe place for people with differences or disabilities, but, in  society that lacks altruism and kindness, it's not just the disabled who are at risk. In her book, The Sociopath Next Door, clinical psychologist Martha Stout discusses the etymology of sociopathy. Sociopathic individuals don't have a conscience; that is, they don't have an internal bounding force, a sense of obligation rooted in emotional attachment as they don't feel love or affection for other human beings. Twin studies indicate that sociopathy is at least 50 percent genetic: it's a neurodevelopmental deviation which makes (as evidenced by brain imaging) processing more complex emotions in the cerebral cortex a challenge. Based on the measured blood-flow in the brain, interpreting  higher level emotions for a sociopath is like working out a moderately challenging intellectual problem. They experience the more primitive, "limbic" emotions, like anger, fear or pleasure, but they are completely void of love, compassion or empathy.

Interestingly, researchers haven't been able to pinpoint the nurture part of the sociopathy equation, the environmental circumstances that shape the genetically predisposed individual into a full-fledged sociopath. No child rearing practice or parenting failure or any other component in the individual's immediate environment can be linked to sociopathy; therefore, researchers suspect that the missing link might lie in the individual's broader environment, namely his or her culture. Statistics show that in eastern cultures, such as Japan and China, the number of sociopathic individuals is significantly lower than in western cultures. Dr. Stout theorizes that in eastern cultures where interconnectedness and respect for every form of life is a core societal value, individuals with a sociopathic deviation are forced to compensate cognitively for their emotional deficiency in order to blend in. In contrast, western cultures, where sociopathic traits are regarded as assets, provide an ideal environment for sociopathy to fully develop and flourish in genetically predisposed individuals. Alarmingly, there has also been a marked increase in the diagnoses of sociopathy since the last decade in the United States, which should motivate us to take a long critical look at the driving forces and dynamics in our society.  

Anybody who is masochistic enough to read through the comments after disability-related articles is keenly aware that a frighteningly large number of our fellow humans consider people living with disability a mere fiscal burden on society. There is an apparent tendency to assign value to people based on their profitability or their financial contribution to society. I find it rather ironic, or flat-out hypocritical, that there is so much disapproval and railing against "wasting" our scarce resources on accommodations and services for people with disabilities who allegedly don't contribute to society but there is little protest against the outrageous amount of money paid out to basketball players, movie stars and unscrupulous CEO's, whose societal contributions are  questionable. I wonder how someone can find it completely acceptable that a person is paid millions of dollars for being able to skillfully throw a ball, yet suggest that it would be better to euthanize people with severe disability so taxpayers wouldn't be burdened by the 8-dollar hourly wage of the caregiver providing In-home supportive services. 

Some people argue that this indifferent or downright hostile attitude towards disability is a natural human instinct that stems from our predatory self and the survivalism which is the moving force behind evolution. However, while "selfish survivalism" serves the interest of the individual on the short run, selfless altruism ensures the continued existence of a group. This tendency to put group interest first, to the extent of risking individual safety, is not an exclusive characteristic of humans and it has been observed in species such as primates, deer, and crows. As for predatory tendencies, psychological research shows that conscience-bound, normal human beings are not natural predators; in fact, people need to be specifically conditioned to be able to kill in battle, and taking lives results in long-lasting psychological effects such as PTSD, severe depression and even suicide. Therefore, we are not natural-born killers and while we do have a strong instinctive tendency towards survival, our inclination to be altruistic is also encoded in us . Is it possible then that it's a matter of choice?