Sunday, January 09, 2005

Logical Bitch-Slap, Marx vs. Books and Kantian Torture

The Maverick never fails to please. Except when he makes me think too hard -- that hurts.

Here he puts the smack down in his own defense. He is right, or course. It is terribly important that we are clear about what is that we should actually be arguing. Logic is very helpful in this regard, but only if one is willing to submit to it.

Here he voices a complaint of bookish types everywhere. Steve, read this. In so doing, he makes an argument I have made before. Leftism is evil. I have always liked Aristotle's ethics of habit. Why do so many people habituate themselves to theft? You might also want to see this.

Here he makes my head hurt a little. Again, he is right about the inherent problems, but I think Nietzsche and Hume are right in the sense that things will go better for us if we are more skeptical of broad claims than we are of the simple. I don't mean this in any technical way; I just mean it practically.

Here he takes up a discussion about the ethics of torture. Specifically, why are we not hearing from Consequentialists defending torture? He is also confused by the distinction between absolute and nonabsolute deontology. I am with him here. The way I see it, there can be no such thing as nonabsolute deontology. I think that is the sort of thing that occurs when one has tried to examine some issue, like torture, from a deontological perspective and screwed it up. Then, when the result is unpalatable you change the rules.

Also, as always, it is important to be very clear about the problem we wish to submit to a deontological analysis. There are many activities which we may want to call torture, some of which actually are torture and some we should not call torture. This is probably the cause of the trouble for deontologists. It is easy to condemn categorically hot pokers and such, but sleep deprivation? I mean, come on, a few days without sleep is NOTHING like a hot poker up your ass (neither is the threat of electrocution anything like the deed). Allowing this does not require a new ethics.

Well, it's late, my pipe is out and my head hurts. Thanks Bill.

1 comment:

Endymion said...

Bill the Maverick Philosopher Said:

You're welcome. I'm glad you are getting something out of my weblog. I see you have a second B.A. in Latin. I'll have to be careful when I start throwing it.
Bill Vallicella | Homepage: http://maverickphilosopher.blogspot.com/ | 01.09.05 - 6:38 pm |