Put logic second: Plato, Petrarch and Levinas
In a past essay I argued for Levinas’ vision of ethics as first philosophy over Heidegger’s being as first philosophy. Ironically as Heidegger places metaphysics as a construction of western philosophy so is his placement of being as first philosophy. In this sense, placing logic over emotion lead to disaster. Prioritising politics over relations destroyed the very core structure from the inside.
He may argue that believers for the past millennia had placed God before himself but even if so, it was an excuse more than a submission to divine good. Few examples were purely zealously motivated. Instead the entire corpus of western philosophy attempted to quell otherness with falsified social harmony. The evils of the world are motivated by selfishness and greed. While many believers may have claimed dignity as an excuse for their atrocities, it was their own haste for destruction that bread violence. There was no revelation to do such horrible acts.
Sidestepping the long line of fabricated religious excuses, the democratic regimes were unsuccessful because they placed logic first. They attempted to do away with the former system with an autonomous national model. A structural implant that will protect the people. A model of security by law. The constitutional order will preserve the social variance. By etching mutual agreement into stone it was forever stamped as the mode of life. There was no escaping it. In many ways it was successful at first. The social contract by way of the law ensured stability and harmony. Yet as civilisation developed, the law could not keep up with the progression. The law became more sophisticated. The gap only widened as the wealthy took advantage of this turbulence to give themselves more power causing social unrest. The social unrest enabled outside forces to take over whether Macedon or Caesar.
Law is the logical form that cements the obligations of one to the other. Rome had experts work on it to ensure its rigid objectivity. Yet law is a rational ideal not an emotional one. If people begin to feel dissatisfied with the state or disagree, they may begin to shed their allegiances. The sack of Rome was due to an internal remoteness. People did not feel connected. There was no concern for the other because it was canonised. An abstract periodic code. People did their own thing and fulfilled their legal obligations. They did not feel the need to go above and beyond. To care for their neighbour because the law became the way of life. A dangerous system that wreaked havoc as social ties faded and people cared less and tried to fulfil their own needs. Overbearing the legal system to find loopholes and improve despite ethical injustice.
Christian’s argued that legalism was bad and love was the correct way. Yet their love was not that of Plato. They particularised love in their dogmatic form. In the ideological push, love was only for selective people. Concern was certain sects that accepted the correct path. It was not gifted to all. Only a correctly chosen destiny would provide the ethical quandaries. Resisting resilient Jews were frequent targets. Since they did not accept love not only did they not get comfort they were attacked. The christian ethic laced with hellenistic universalism became a model for specifically inclined morality. Only those deemed worthy would receive. A far cry from any human rights. Natural rights faltered from its equal universality. As it did not adequately punish nor prevent Jewish suffering at the hands of christian believers.
Renaissance thinking brought back humanism in its brief history before religious infighting stalled its momentum. Yet it fostered enlightenment human rights based in law. Having not learned from the greek failures they began with white land owning males after slaves and finally women. The humanistic ordeal slowly died in the logical structuralism of democracy. Constitutional justice with separation of powers would ensure better ethics. The twentieth century was a time of turbulence with quashing Central American economies, Jim Crowe racism and democratic universalism. The government has slowly attained more power than originally intended. The law is over sophisticated for no reason. Representatives have committed the same horrid actions as their ancient counterparts. Though it does seem that today is way more malicious. It is way more deceptive. Human rights are being trampled. The government is spying on the nation without their knowledge, restricting gun rights and imprisoning people for light drugs.
Constitutional allegiance is archaic and stoic. There is no emotion no concern. The moral voices of Spinoza, Marx and Peterson are attacking the structural inadequacies. Each took a stab at the political issues and screamed for change. This has yet to fully take place. We are still in a logic first society. Harris recently wrote a book detailing science as teaching morality. It is not logic but responsibility. An ethical relation that precedes the political structure. It is the prophetic impulse of ancient Israel and moral primacy of Plato and Jesus. Responsibility can be dangerous as well. Islam is a perfect modern example of a zealous people acting on pure fervour in phobia mania of democratic takeover. The ethic must be internalised in the psyche. The structure is the framework to which people can rely on functionality but the ethical will is a preceding otherness. Accepting accountability for the whole. A proactive measure instead of a stale legal matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment