From: bahna@rpi.edu
Date: Wed Mar 12 2003 - 17:29:05 GMT
To All,
I recently came across a quote from Rorty that Matt cited in his essay
again reading Consequences of Pragmatism. The quote is:
“This means that when the secret police come, when the torturers violate
the innocent, there is nothing to be said to them of the form ‘There is
something within you which you are betraying. Though you embody the
practices of a totalitarian society which will endure forever, there is
something beyond those practices which condemns you.’”
I think it is a very powerful quote and it has led me to think about social
conditioning. These secret police will presumably only be following orders
of their leaders. They are valuing social patterns over intellectual ones
in MOQ terms. I think we can say the same thing if we were able to speak
with the 9/11 hijackers. Likewise, the pilots of American planes, who will
drop 3000 bombs in the first 48 hours of an invasion of Iraq with the
complete knowledge that innocent civilians will be killed, according to
military officials, are conditioned to place social values over higher
moral ones - by following orders.
When society chooses its heroes, often these heroes fall within these
categories. Individuals who have been conditioned to follow orders and
disregard the danger these orders will put him or her self in and also the
immoral consequences of these orders. For example, many of us were struck
by the image of the firemen rushing up the stairways to their deaths on
9/11. This was certainly a courageous act. But, it was an act that each
of them were socially conditioned to perform. They were just doing their
job. I don’t mean to downplay the tragedy of their deaths; I just wonder
how a society chooses its heroes. Who are the heroes; someone who is
conditioned by society to follow orders and perform acts at the expense of
their own personal safety-for the good of society, or individuals who defy
this conditioning and act in the interests of some other purpose? This
purpose might include interests in democracy, humanity, future generations,
freedom of expression, etc. - or perhaps, simply the interests of their own
or their families safety.
I was also struck by Matt’s discussion of ethnocentrism and Rorty’s idea of
America’s anti-ethno ethnocentrism. I think this basically encompasses a
post-philosophical ideal that might be captured under the idea of empathy.
In other words, in addition to the American regard for their democratic
principles, we also value an empathetic principle in regards to individuals
in other cultures, at least in principle, it not always in practice. When
our founding fathers said, “WE hold these truths to be self-evident, All
men are created equal…”, this might have been interpreted to mean only
white wealthy landlords at the time it was written, but over time we have
extended this include all people-men and women-in all cultures around the
world (again, in principle-although there is still work to do in practice).
Thus our nationalism, ethnocentrism, involves recognizing the common
traits in humanity beyond our national borders.
So, we quite naturally are drawn to considering these ideals as more moral
than others and we can justify our willingness to impose these values on
other cultures. The Pirsig quote, on the civil war, can be used to justify
any number of actions. I don’t have a difficulty with this kind of
ethnocentrism, because I do agree with the ideals and morality of democracy
and of having empathy for all other people. However, I don’t think the
loss of life that occurred during the civil war can ever be justified, IMO.
There could have been more imaginative ways to influence the demise of
slavery in the south beyond the careless loss of life that ensued during
this war. However, in the case of the civil war, the loss of life was
mostly contained to soldiers who were conditioned to put their life on the
line and civilians were, for the most part, spared.
Modern warfare does not make this distinction in life. The bombing of an
urban center does not distinguish between civilians and soldiers.
Americans have recently (yesterday) tested the largest non-nuclear bomb
ever. It will supposedly not be used in a populated area during the war in
Iraq. But, if Iraqi republican guard can be isolated away from an urban
area, the bomb could be used to wipe out the whole regiment in a single
explosion. This will guarantee that the Iraqi soldiers will stay within
the boundaries of Baghdad. And it is likely, if the American soldiers are
suffering heavy casualties and Saddam remains in power over some duration,
that the bomb will be used over the city of Baghdad.
This should imply that Americans exhaust all diplomatic avenues before
imposing force in removing Saddam from power. There is quality in removing
Saddam from power, but there is no quality in the loss of life resulting
from war. In particular, the loss of innocent life is the lowest quality.
I hesitate however, using “quality” for the justification of diplomacy over
war with Iraq. I can hear the replies already defending war on the basis
of some other “quality.” The real motive for diplomacy should be a
morality which has been formed over our history as Americans. We should
have learned lessons from past mistakes and be imaginative enough to find
new solutions. When I touch someone in a loving way, caressing their skin
softly, the “quality” they feel is reflected back to me. I can feel their
pleasure. I am at peace.
When I strike out at someone in violence, I feel only hatred-theirs and
mine-and the “quality” of the experience is low. I can feel their pain. I
am not at peace. I am in war. I am in fear of their retaliation. My
defenses must remain at the highest level of alert. This is the low
quality future American action in Iraq is now defining for the next
generations-both ours and the rest of the world. Where is our imagination?
Who are our heroes?
Andy
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 12 2003 - 17:29:20 GMT