Imagine a simple, grassroots idea gaining momentum worldwide: people from all walks of life adding to the world’s symbolic landscape a new flag displayed below all of our existing flags.

Its purpose? To foster and normalize global awareness of the fact that, while we humans are different in so many important ways and have for centuries proudly displayed flags symbolizing those differences, we must always remember and honor our intrinsic humanity, as well—all that we share in common even with our differences.

This includes our shared experience of profound concern for the safety and happiness of loved ones; our own desires for health and knowledge; our dependence on the plants and animals of the Earth; and our shared susceptibilities to pain and pleasure, illness and injury. There are thousands of human “samenesses.” Not least among them is a core existential desire and need to feel safe and at home in the world—something that takes hold at about two-and-a-half to three years of age, then lives on within each of us every day of our lives no matter the masks we may put on or take off from time to time to hide our vulnerability.

A series of paradigm-shifting discoveries by neuroscientists and cognitive and developmental psychologists in the last 60-70 years have revealed for the first time in history the startling “advance role” played by our own healthy, embodied non-conscious brains (working closely with our autonomic nervous systems) to inform, prime, and even partly pre-steer what we consciously experience seconds later (sometimes just a few hundredths of a second later) as our own fully conscious, fully intentional behaviors, for which, of course, we are responsible. Where such behaviors predictably affect the well-being of other people, it is no longer valid for any of us to consider our awareness of one or more of that person’s human differences only sufficient by itself to meet the bottom-up coherence (baseline structural rationality) requirement for performing any and all moral actions after, say, age five or six.  It now appears, based on these and other recent scientific findings, that only by adding to our active, targeted awareness of “the other” at least one human sameness (e.g., This person wants to feel safe and at home in the world)  can we, as moral actors, be assured that any intentional interactions we have with that person will be—and will be seen by relevant others as—not running afoul of the implicit but universal strict prohibition against the intentional performance of a moral action that lacks baseline coherence (structural rationality). See Presuppositions and Definitions.

The Companion Flag is a daily reminder of the importance of seeing in others (and ourselves!) both their (and our) important human differences (some of which are represented by the world’s various host flags) and our intrinsic samenesses as human beings. It is designed to complement, not clash with or detract from the beauty and significance of the flags flying above it. It’s a simple white flag featuring in each case a single stripe of color across the top that matches any color appearing in the host flag above—a visual nod to their companionship on the pole. (For a third-party perspective, click here.)

The message of the two flags flying together is this: “Here, we are proud of our differences, our diversity, and our special affiliations, but we are mindful, too, of our essential humanity and all that we share in common with people everywhere.”

For those who fly flags at home and/or do so for governments, schools, businesses, or other organizations, this idea presents two paths: (1) Adopt and fly the Companion Flag below your existing flags; or (2) Decline the Companion Flag and continue flying flags strictly to emphasize our cherished national, regional or group distinctiveness and separation from other people around the globe.

The question for today’s reader is: Which of these two practices offers greater hope for fostering in the world’s children and future generations an inclination towards others marked by fellow feeling, patience, acceptance, compassionate regard, and (most importantly) a personal commitment and preference for non-violent conflict resolution whenever possible?