The formation and final cognition of a person's three views are the result of many factors, which are related to family background, education, social beating frequency, circle of friends, work status, economic conditions and other reasons. This thing can only be regarded as one of the elements at most.
Books are the grindstone of your thoughts, but they are not the master key.
1, the monarch of Machiavelli
Social Darwinism, the absolute law of survival of the fittest.
A rational person with exquisite egoism and absolute egoism.
Machiavellianism, all the ideas put forward in monarchism can be summed up in machiavellianism.
For your idea of looking at the problem from the perspective of interests, it is not recommended that everyone imitate it without brains.
2, "Hidden Rules" 3, "The Law of Blood Reward" Wu Si
The "hidden rules" tell us that there are actually two kinds of rules in this world. One is superficial law and morality, called Ming rules; One is a private way of doing things, called hidden rules. Only when both rules are met can one thing be done well. Violation of the Ming rules, unfavorable start, easy to leave a handle, and be settled afterwards; If you violate the unspoken rules, it is all kinds of meanings, but things just can't be done well.
The law of blood reward puts forward a concept of "meta-rule" on the basis of clear rules and hidden rules, and meta-rule is a rule above everything else.
4. The Game of Love: John gotman and Nunn Silver.
Understanding love from the perspective of game theory.
Who you are, from what angle and from what position, you will come to different conclusions.
5, "The Mystery of the Cave" Saab
Five people were trapped in a closed cave. In order to wait for rescue, one person proposed to draw lots to sacrifice one person as food for everyone to continue their survival time. One person withdraws temporarily before the draw, but the person who withdraws from the sampling results needs to sacrifice. The other four people were rescued by killing people to prolong their lives, and were later sentenced to death by the court for intentional homicide.
If life is above everything else, is it legal to eat people for survival?
Does the life disposal agreement made by five people have legal effect? Does this legal effect have power over life?
Eating someone else's life for your own life, which is higher, self-protection or intentional injury?
How should secular ethics view the judgment of this case?
Can a person die of his own proposal be considered suicide?
If the law is to protect the interests of the majority, then four fifths of the people are protected. Does the law mean that all four people are okay?
Content reference internet