Imagine a Djinn

Imagine you found a magic lamp with a djinn who will grant you a wish. What would you wish for? Money? Power? Fame? Fortune? Immortality? Cure all disease? End world hunger? World peace? What would be the most moral wish you could make?

 

What is Morality?

  When you see someone being hurt, or stolen from, or insulted do you get a gut reaction—a feeling that there is something wrong about whatever is happening? If you do, then you are experiencing the phenomenon of morality. 
 

Ultimately when we speak of morality, we are referring to these specific feelings we get when we see or think about certain kinds of actions. Some actions make us feel a positive feeling, which we label as moral actions. Some give us a negative feeling, which we label immoral actions. When trying to discover what morality is, we are trying to find out what causes these feelings and what, if anything, do the feelings refer to.
 

It is possible that these feelings are just an illusory byproduct of evolution and refer to nothing in reality independent of our imagination--like a mirage off in the distance--in which case, there is no objective morality. It is simply a subjective evolutionary inclination. But maybe, just maybe, our feelings about morality are more like our eyes. Perceiving something that is actually there—existing in reality outside of our imagination. If that is the case, then morality refers to something which is objective. 

If there is such a thing, what might it be? A God’s nature? An undiscovered law of nature? A moral particle? An abstract or platonic object? A new law of logic?  There are many possibilities it could be, as with any currently unknown phenomenon. In order to come to an answer, we must follow the evidence to try to discover the truth.





















 

 

​
 

A Different Answer

My answer is this:
 

I would wish for the djinn to create the best of all possible worlds.

Not in the religious sense.
Not a paradise enforced by rules or gods.
But a world with one defining property:

It is physically impossible for any conscious being to be forced to do anything they do not consent to.

In this world:

• Every conscious being gets their own universe

• They can design it however they like

• Interaction with others is purely voluntary

• No one can override anyone else’s will—not by violence, not by law, not by circumstance

Nothing needs to be enforced—because imposition itself is impossible.

If this strikes you as more moral than the wish you initially imagined—or at least a serious contender—then you already understand the core of the model.
 

What This Reveals

This thought experiment exposes a simple but radical idea:

The deepest moral problem is not suffering, inequality, or bad outcomes.
It is being forced against one’s will.

Most moral systems focus on:

• Outcomes (utilitarianism)

• Rules (deontology)

• Character (virtue ethics)

• Authority (religion)

This model asks a different question:

Where, exactly, did someone’s will get overridden?
 

The Core Idea (Plain Language)

The model is built on a single foundation:

All involuntary imposition on the will of a conscious being is immoral.
All voluntary assistance of the will of a conscious being is moral.

That’s it.

No divine commands.
No maximization functions.
No moral bookkeeping.

Just one question, applied consistently:

Was someone forced, or did they consent?
 

Why This Matters

This framework explains things that other moral systems struggle with:
 

1. Why nature can be morally bad without being “evil”

A rock falling on someone violates their will.
That’s bad—even if no one is to blame.
 

2. Why good intentions don’t justify harm

Saving five people by killing one non-consenting person is still immoral—because someone was used as a means.
 

3. Why minimizing harm doesn’t magically make actions moral

Reducing suffering matters—but it does not convert coercion into virtue.
 

4. Why consent is morally fundamental

If an action is voluntary, it does not violate morality—even if others dislike it.