Thus systems ethical theory hypothesizes that ethical behavior develops with time and conditions through a definable series of stages. The stages are seen as pre-programmed in a somewhat MacDougalian instinctive sense. Each stage is dependent for its emergence, upon certain dynamical states in the brain that are released by certain life circumstances. It represents that when certain phenomenological conditions arise in the life of a person, a clan, a society or possibly a nation that a certain form of ethical behavior will be associated with these phenomenological conditions.

The theory suggests that under life circumstances A(lc), when dynamical system A(o) is met with releasor conditions A(r) that the ethical state of affairs A will arise. Stage A would be one of no morality. When phenomenological conditions change and factors B(lc), B(o) and B(r) are present the M thema of ethical behavior will arise. Then as factors C(lc), C(o) and C(r) come to exist ethical behavior based on the N thema will emerge, etc. possibly ad infinitum, possible to some final end.

It hypothesizes that each emerging ethical system, after the first amoral stage, has a basic thema with specific values as to what is right and wrong in behavior stemming from this thema. In particular circumstances each ethical system may emphasize some values of the thema and may minimize other values. Each ethical system may, if conditions are right, develop its normally pre-programmed from or it may, depending on conditions, become a mostrum in excessu or a monstrum in defectu.

The theory proposes, also, that the N system of ethics always follows the M system with the O system to follow the N and the P system to follow O, etc. But the theory allows for variation from the M or N thema. It does propose that in the beginning of man’s emergence from animal like to human like behavior the first ethical thema by which he will live will be M. But, it proposes also, that in another set of life circumstances, at the same level of emergence the M thema will be particularized as M(1) a variant on the thema M. These thematic variations must be hypothesized to be consistent with the concept of dynamic brain systems because dynamic systems consist of sub-family dynamic systems wherein each is in contact with all other dynamic systems. Thus, the intellectual system, the motivational system, the feeling system, the perceptual system and the ethical system are all in contact. Therefore if changes in one are not sufficient to restructuralize thoroughly the others the resultant is a variation on the thema of the moment rather than the emergence of a new thema. And, new thema emerges only if the change in one system is so great as to restructuralize all others. An example of the latter would be the arisal of new intellectual insights enabling certain humans to make the problem of survival relatively assured. Such a change, in a dynamic family, would be sufficient to spontaneously reorganize all other sub families and would be sufficient to move those humans to the next ethical developmental stage.

One other aspect of the theory should be understood. It pertains to the fate of the particular values of right and wrong within each ethical system. All of the previous ideas as to what is right in behavior and what is wrong in behavior do not necessarily change as man’s ethical concepts evolve from the M thema, to the N thema and later in time to the O thema? Not all values change. Some of the specific values of the B-M system of ethics will remain as part of the C-N system of ethics. Also when the D-O system of ethics arises there will still be recurrent values from the B-M system but this reminder of B-M values will be less in the D-O system than in the C-N system.