After the evil knight departed, I returned to what Callibius had said
before Church's priest had joined us.

"So, Callibius, you stated a bit ago that morality is to be scorned.
Unless we are to have another guest join us, perhaps you could
elaborate?" I asked, "Though I hope you take this in stride since the
last two people to engage in discussion seemed to take some affront at
its conclusions."

"Certainly!", said Callibius, "I do keep an open mind in life, and so I
will not take anything we deduce as a personal insult. As for
elaborating, I hire people for the Quisalis Mark. This organization is
based on slaying people for profit. We impose no rules on our members
for whom to slay. The profit is what matters. The root of this mentality
is not about actions that benefit the community, but rather that which
benefits you. I say that those who do not act in such a way will lose
out to those who follow personal greed. I think Indrani embodies that,
though I am not sure since I am not involved in Her order. But the life
of sin for personal gain nonetheless would appear more attractive than
the alternative."

"A very interesting statement. Perhaps you could give me an example?" I
inquired.

"Certainly! I believe that in every situation, the moral person is worse
off than the immoral person. In a contract, the moral person could cheat
to his advantage. This benefits him while hurting the other party who,
being moral, would not try to cheat in return. Similarly, an immoral
person could pay off an immoral politician to get him personal gain from
the government, such as unfairly lowered property taxes. Both the
immoral parties benefit at the expense of tax payers who, being moral
citizens, paid their proper taxes and in fact have to pay higher taxes
to make up for the lost revenue of the immoral shop owner's unfair
rate."

He continued, "Furthermore, when you examine this position, you should
look at immorality in its perfect extreme. A person who is perfectly
immoral never gets caught because he is perfect at what he does. Flawed
immoral people are stigmatized as robbers and murderers. On the other
hand, a perfectly immoral person who appropriates the assets of the
citizens and robs them of their freedom while maintaining the illusion
of freedom is hailed as a great city leader by his slaves. It is these
types of people who have perfected immorality who show the great
benefits of that path in life. Honestly, the only reason immorality has
a bad reputation is people fear being on the receiving end, not because
people fear to engage in it."

I thought about what Callibius had said, and it was indeed a very clever
observation. I pondered, "So the claim is that the life of a perfect
criminal is more rewarding than a life of integrity."

"Yes, that is exactly my claim," said Callibius, "Immorality is sound
judgement engaged by those who are clever and smart enough to engage in
it perfectly, dominating governments and societies, etc. I would also
add that people who engage in morality must not be clever and smart, for
only a fool would not engage in such a profitable endeavor."

"So then, would you say that a moral person would wish to set himself up
as superior to another moral person, or as superior to moral behaviour?"
I asked.

"I do not believe that would be in the mind of a moral person."

I continued, "What about against an immoral person?"

"Certainly! I would say a moral person would try to put himself above
immoral people, but not above moral people and behaviour. And I suspect
I can anticipate your next question: I would also say that an immoral
person seeks to place himself above everyone, to gain the upper hand in
all things he engages in."

I summarized, "So a moral person seeks to put himself above those who
are not like him while not doing so against those who are like him.
Immoral people, on the other hand, aim to be superior to those who are
like him and not like him."

"Very well put," said Callibius.

"Since you said immoral people are clever and smart, then an immoral
person and one who is clever and smart must have some resemblances, and
a moral person must not resemble such. So perhaps we should seek out and
find types of people who resemble what we believe is a moral person and
an immoral person, and then we will have identified moral and immoral
people."

"That sounds fair," he replied.

I continued, "Now I am going to go on a side track, but I think it will
come into place in the end so bear with me. Some people are musical, and
some are not. Which one resembles being more clever and smarter than the
other?"

"A musical person, since it does take a good mind to understand music,"
answered Callibius.

"And what of someone who is skilled at medicine?"

"Again, those skilled in medicine would resemble one who is clever and
smart when compared to one who is unskilled in it since that art
requires a good mind."

"It would seem clear that one who is clever in something is skilled in
it. So back to the previous example, while a musician is tuning his harp
or a doctor is healing a patient, would they want to set themselves as
superior to other musicians and doctors? And I ask the same question,
though as superior to a tone deaf person or someone unlearned in the
ways of medicine?"

Callibius replied, "I do not see why such people would engage in making
themselves superior to others in their trade, but they would certainly
wish to show themselves as superior to those not in their trade, lest
their profession lose its meaning."

"It seems to me that in any situation, one who is knowledgeable in
something is motivated by surpassing those that lack the knowledge so as
to show the usefulness of their profession. On the other hand, they
would have actions and words that would be identical to those who share
that knowledge, and so they would not be engaging in showing their
superiority to those who are the same as them. Now what of the
ignoramus? Surely he would try to set himself up as superior to everyone
so that no one would be able to reveal his lack of knowledge."

"That sounds reasonable," said Callibius.

"One must be knowledgeable to be clever and smart, and knowledgeable
people maintain superiority over the unknowledgeable, similar to the
behaviour we found to be true for those who practice moral behaviour. On
the other hand, we have found that ignorant people seek to place
themselves above everyone to hide their ignorance, and that resembles
the behaviour we have identified for the immoral person. It follows," I
said, "that it is a moral person who resembles a clever person, and it
is a stupid person who resembles the immoral person. We agreed that when
we identified this resemblance then we would have identified the moral
and immoral person. Thus we have proven than a moral person is clever
and smart while an immoral person is ignorant and stupid."

Callibius thought about that for a moment, but he pressed forward. "That
is indeed an intriguing observation, but it still does not prove nor
disprove my original point, that perfect immorality is makes for a
better life. Perhaps you should focus your attention on that area."

"Ah yes," I said, "I have become a bit distracted. Thank you for getting
me on track; let us look into that area specifically. Would you agree
that a community or band of thieves or any other group would have a
better chance at success if they worked together mutually rather than if
they quarreled among themselves and wronged each other?"

"Certainly."

"Immorality breeds hatred and conflict, so then a community would
ultimately be unable to work together if they were comprised of purely
immoral people. So it seems that an immoral community is doomed to less
reward than a moral one. But we want to look at the individual, though
perhaps this communal perspective may be useful, that immorality hinders
coordinated action and generates hostility against other people, both
moral and immoral."

"Perhaps it shall, "said Callibius, "Though it does seem clear that
immoral people are less capable of getting things done, and if we were
to claim that a band of purely immoral people have ever been effective
or have completed a concerted effort then we would not be telling the
whole truth since they would be at each other's throats. Clearly any
group that has worked successful together had to have some degree of
morality within them that refrained them from wronging others in the
group."

"Let's look at function. We see best with our eyes, and that is what
they do best. So we would say that seeing is a function of the eyes.
Similarly, we would say that the ears' function is hearing for much the
same reason."

"That sounds correct."

I went further, "Although we could cut fabric with a longsword or
scimitar, it is much more effective to use a scissors. Thus it is a
function of scissors to cut cloth, but it is not the function of swords
to do so."

"Agreed," said Callibius, "It sounds like a function of anything is that
which can only be done by that thing, or is best performed by that
thing."

"A very good observation. Now would you agree that anything which has a
function also has a state of being good?" I asked, "For example, the
function of eyes is to see, and so there can be a state of eyes where
they are good eyes, ones that see far and in dim light? And similarly
there are states of ears that are good and states of scissors that are
good."

"Also agreed."

"So then can anything perform its function in a bad state?"

"Clearly not," answered Callibius, "Blind eyes can not perform their
functions, a dull and bent scissors can not perform its functions, and
so forth."

"So it seems that in the absence of a good state, things perform their
functions poorly, or not at all," I stated, "Now let us look at the
mind. Do you believe that a function of the mind is to manage one's
life?"

"Most certainly," he said, "The alone mind controls the body and one's
choices and actions, and so those actions are only performed by the
mind, making it a function of the mind."

I concluded, "So then since nothing can perform its job well in a bad
state, it must be the case that management and authority of one's life
will inevitably be handled badly by a bad mind, whereas a good mind will
do things well. Since we showed that a weak mind is possessed by the
immoral while a strong mind is possessed by the moral, then it seems
that the immoral person would only be able to manage his life poorly.
Anyone who leads a quality life is happy and fulfilled, while those who
lead a poor quality life are unhappy and unfulfilled. No one is well off
because they are unhappy, but rather because they are happy. So though
immorality may or may not lead to more wealth and power, it is
nonetheless not fulfilling since it leads not to happiness. Thus it is
the moral person who is better off than the immoral one."

"Well argued indeed," said Callibius, "Though I must admit that I am not
fully convinced. Wealth has often bought me happiness. Perhaps I can
demosntrate this to you at the Crystal Leaf Inn with a purchased mug of
ale!"

"If that is true, friend, then perhaps there is a hidden streak of
morality buried inside you. I accept your offer!"

Penned by my hand on the 10th of Phaestian, in the year 329 AF.