It is mankind's way of taking on the role of Karma and having a say in how situations are resolved.Leave it alone and what needs to be done,will be,without the meddling of man.
In a way, I like Kant's categorical imperative because it's not concerned with outcomes. I think that's one of the unspoken, composite points of Hebrews 11, the "faith hall of fame" chapter as we called it in my charismatic days. You can overturn kingdoms and do justice, our you could get sawn in two. Either way, the eschatology is the same: you'll be resurrected and active in the earth's age to come. I know I don't "act in faith" sometimes because I overthink things, and overthinking things usually means I'm fixated on the possible consequences. (Hannah Arendt, I think, says the same thing: we can't possibly know the consequences of our actions. She credits Jesus with being all act, but she credits him also with making forgiveness a political virtue. She thinks forgiveness is necessary because action is necessary.)
But then I think the categorical imperative sometimes takes too long to think about. Is the universal rule "What if we all killed?" or "What if we all took the opportunity to kill someone who was about to drop a hydrogen bomb onto the world?" By the time I'd come up with the right universal question, it might be too late to act (depending on which was the correct question all along). Maybe that's just th trolley car thing again.
I also think the categorical imperative needs to be mixed with wisdom, or at least sechel, which I think Paul used a good deal of in the book of Acts. Wisdom does often involve a consideration of consequences.
I've gone on for so long. I agree with you about nonviolence. Making exceptions to it feels like playing God, who looks at things (you can tell I like Hebrews) from the point of view of the kingdom of heaven, which is now and not yet. Is this like Tolstoy's framework? I don't know. I remember that he taught Gandhi a lot about Jesus and nonviolence.
Anyway, a really fascinating post. Thanks for a fresh perspective and for connecting recent events to the likes of Kant, Gandhi, and King.
So much great food for thought here on outcome vs. intention! I definitely need to read more Arendt, she's such a fascinating thinker. And the distinction of the categorical imperative in extraordinary circumstances is worth wrestling through--this is why we have laws, I suppose, though I have a love/hate relationship with rules as I've seen them abused so often. Thanks for your thoughts on this, I look forward to reading more of your work.
Excellent article. I wonder why our first assumption of time travel is 'kill baby Hitler' and not 'teach baby Hitler compassion, love, etc.'
I have noticed this inclination of some on the left to drift towards violence as a solution. It reads the same as watching the Religious Right walk back their principles when politically expedient. If I am willing to give up my beliefs for political gain, I've already lost.
I wonder why,an attempt to justify violence is ever made."Justice" being a meaningless term,that only seeks to balance acts that never should have occurred,but never can succeed.
Haha, you know me, I just can't keep my nose out of things. And yes, it's interesting how Kant (who didn't want to base morality on religion) ended up in a similar place to Jesus and Buddha when it came to the golden rule.
Great article, Katharine. Violence begets violence. Demagogues like Trump shape movements, but they also ride the wave of peoples' worst instincts. If he had been killed last weekend, the MAGA movement would not suddenly dry up and blow away. Conspiracy theories would thrive, and people like JD Vance would rise up and try to grab the mantel. We are left with the long, hard work of shifting culture and creating communities where are values can be lived. I write this with more certainty than I feel. Sustaining love and justice always feels like gardening. So many things out of our control can go wrong.
It is mankind's way of taking on the role of Karma and having a say in how situations are resolved.Leave it alone and what needs to be done,will be,without the meddling of man.
Ah I see what you mean. Thanks for sharing this interesting perspective. It's definitely got me thinking!
In a way, I like Kant's categorical imperative because it's not concerned with outcomes. I think that's one of the unspoken, composite points of Hebrews 11, the "faith hall of fame" chapter as we called it in my charismatic days. You can overturn kingdoms and do justice, our you could get sawn in two. Either way, the eschatology is the same: you'll be resurrected and active in the earth's age to come. I know I don't "act in faith" sometimes because I overthink things, and overthinking things usually means I'm fixated on the possible consequences. (Hannah Arendt, I think, says the same thing: we can't possibly know the consequences of our actions. She credits Jesus with being all act, but she credits him also with making forgiveness a political virtue. She thinks forgiveness is necessary because action is necessary.)
But then I think the categorical imperative sometimes takes too long to think about. Is the universal rule "What if we all killed?" or "What if we all took the opportunity to kill someone who was about to drop a hydrogen bomb onto the world?" By the time I'd come up with the right universal question, it might be too late to act (depending on which was the correct question all along). Maybe that's just th trolley car thing again.
I also think the categorical imperative needs to be mixed with wisdom, or at least sechel, which I think Paul used a good deal of in the book of Acts. Wisdom does often involve a consideration of consequences.
I've gone on for so long. I agree with you about nonviolence. Making exceptions to it feels like playing God, who looks at things (you can tell I like Hebrews) from the point of view of the kingdom of heaven, which is now and not yet. Is this like Tolstoy's framework? I don't know. I remember that he taught Gandhi a lot about Jesus and nonviolence.
Anyway, a really fascinating post. Thanks for a fresh perspective and for connecting recent events to the likes of Kant, Gandhi, and King.
So much great food for thought here on outcome vs. intention! I definitely need to read more Arendt, she's such a fascinating thinker. And the distinction of the categorical imperative in extraordinary circumstances is worth wrestling through--this is why we have laws, I suppose, though I have a love/hate relationship with rules as I've seen them abused so often. Thanks for your thoughts on this, I look forward to reading more of your work.
Good point about the purpose of laws. I share your love/hate relationship with rules. :-) (and a sigh)
Excellent article. I wonder why our first assumption of time travel is 'kill baby Hitler' and not 'teach baby Hitler compassion, love, etc.'
I have noticed this inclination of some on the left to drift towards violence as a solution. It reads the same as watching the Religious Right walk back their principles when politically expedient. If I am willing to give up my beliefs for political gain, I've already lost.
Very good points. We either hold these principles regardless of circumstances or we don't actually hold them at all.
I wonder why,an attempt to justify violence is ever made."Justice" being a meaningless term,that only seeks to balance acts that never should have occurred,but never can succeed.
Justification can be a thin excuse, for sure, though I'm not sure I follow to "justice" being meaningless.
Well done! You’re a brave soul to take on politics in this moment, but I like the U Principle … in fact, it sounds a lot like the golden rule.
Haha, you know me, I just can't keep my nose out of things. And yes, it's interesting how Kant (who didn't want to base morality on religion) ended up in a similar place to Jesus and Buddha when it came to the golden rule.
Great article, Katharine. Violence begets violence. Demagogues like Trump shape movements, but they also ride the wave of peoples' worst instincts. If he had been killed last weekend, the MAGA movement would not suddenly dry up and blow away. Conspiracy theories would thrive, and people like JD Vance would rise up and try to grab the mantel. We are left with the long, hard work of shifting culture and creating communities where are values can be lived. I write this with more certainty than I feel. Sustaining love and justice always feels like gardening. So many things out of our control can go wrong.
you're right, it's long, slow work. All we can do is tend our little justice sprouts and hope they grow.