What does it actually mean to call something “right” or “wrong” if you do not believe in cosmic commandments, divine scorekeepers, or moral laws carved into the fabric of reality? In this episode, we walk through a Mystrikal answer: an ethic rooted in well-being across three intertwined domains — sapient beings, sentient life, and nature’s ecosystems.

You will hear how Mystrikism starts with honestly declared values (like reducing unnecessary suffering and increasing flourishing) and then hands the steering wheel to evidence and disciplined reasoning. No metaphysical moral facts, no supernatural rules — just a reality-facing, “method-first” approach where psychology, public health, ecology, law, and economics become tools for moral inquiry. We explore what it means for moral conclusions to be subjectively grounded yet methodologically objective, and why Mystriks talk about justice as “naturalised”: tested, measurable, and open to revision.

Across the episode we dig into how this framework handles intention and consequence, why compassion needs boundaries, and what Mystrikism calls Principled Disgust — a reason-governed refusal to tolerate deliberate cruelty, malignant deception, reckless exploitation, and sustained injustice. You will hear concrete ways this tri-domain view can guide personal behaviour, social policy, and our treatment of other animals and ecosystems, all while keeping “awe” fully naturalised through Aweism.

If you have ever wondered how to talk about right and wrong without appealing to gods or metaphysical absolutes, yet still care deeply about justice, kindness, truth, and the only world we have, this episode is for you.

https://www.mystrikism.org

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1782830925522213/

mystrikism@pm.me