Moral Principles Are Abstracted from Moral Experience

By -
In Two Cheers for Anarchism, James C. Scott tells the story of a community of French farmers who had, when asked in the abstract, refused to help Jewish refuges from the Nazis. But when faced with actual Jews, they hid and fed them. He concludes:
Once the individual villagers had made such a gesture, they typically became committed to helping the refuges for the duration. They were, in other words, able to draw the conclusions of their own practical gesture of solidarity -- their actual line of conduct -- and see it as the ethical thing to do. They did not enunciate a principle and then act on it. Rather, they acted, and then drew out the logic of their act. Abstract principle was the child of practical action, not its parent. -- p. 131

Comments

  1. Silas Barta9:29 PM

    Or they were succumbing to the need to feel consistent, regardless of induced cognitive dissonance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ken B10:02 AM

    This is one of the reasons why I hate and mock all that bogus 'survey science' about throwing fat men in front of trains.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more