Bobby, I was thinking about your friend who’s into utilitarianism. Somehow, I forgot about that when I was making my response to Prospera, but I shouldn’t have, because all utopias end up based on utilitarianism. Sooner or later, usually a lot sooner, the architects of the perfect utopia realize that not everyone is prepared to agree with them and some force is going to be necessary. This means suffering. How can utopia be based on suffering? The answer, of course, is utilitarianism. Yes, many must to suffer right now, right here, but then nobody ever suffers again.
This, of course, was the argument used by every brutal dictator in history. Let’s just look at recent history.
All those millions of people had to die for Hitler to purify the race and to conquer Russia, but then think of all the thousand years of perfect happiness that would follow for everyone who wasn’t killed and all their descendants. Utilitarianism says Hitler was onto something, Or at least he had some justification for his actions, very real, quantifiable justification
Marx? Lenin? Pol Pot? Trump?
A relatively small number (sometimes even millions) had to suffer and die so as to guarantee the ultimate victory of the Utopia and thus the eternal happiness of mankind. At least for the next thousand years or so.
I think the biggest problem is people persist in trying to find the magic formula that gives you the right answer in every single moral situation. The difficulty is, as always, anything involving human beings isn’t simple math. Remember the quants on Wall Street? You’re familiar with all the economists who just knew that everybody always did whatever was in their best financial interest. This is why the social sciences will never actually be sciences. They cannot be because every one of them involves emotion. They involve the irrationality of our species. It can’t be quantified and calculated in an exact manner. At most you can make it somewhat statistical.
I spent decades trying to find something the equivalent of utilitarianism, but actually effective. That is, a true moral code, a reliable guideline that could be applied in any situation. I wasted those years. Although, maybe not. At least I learned a few things in the process. The main thing I learned was what I said above; there is no simple universal answer that can encompass the full scope of humanity. Ultimately we are emotional, not rational. You must look at every individual situation. The best you can come up with some general guidelines which may or may not be applicable in any given specific case.
And even then you get problems. Was Bomber Harris a hero, or was he a monster? The Brits put up a statue to him (I think about 20 years ago) because they think he’s a hero. The rest of Europe was horrified and disgusted, because as far as they’re concerned, he should’ve been hanged at Nuremberg along with the other war criminals. I bet you can guess which group I agree with. If you don’t know about Bomber Harris we’ll talk about it next time we are together.
(And I’m not even beginning to think about the whole issue in Japan, where the war is still officially taught in Japanese schools as Japan being forced into the war by bully America and Class One war criminals are honored as heroes.)
Post script: I really hate this dictation system because it’s so bad. I use it because it is still better than typing but it requires so much proofreading! For example even when I referred to Marks, Lennon and communism… You see what spelling it gave me.
Bomber Harris was just as bad. I don’t know of anyone named Bommer. Maybe that some famous person or maybe not, I wouldn’t know, but Bomber Harris was named after the strategic bombing airplanes he commanded not after some person named Bommer.
I won’t even repeat what it did to Paul pot. Well, there it is anyway.
I give up. I’m gonna post this on my blog. And, yes, I did say I am going to. But it never writes going to. No matter how slowly and carefully I pronounce it, it always types Ghana.
Enough! Enough!
No comments:
Post a Comment