Why do you bore me with that which you yourself call the "liar" fallacy, about which so many books have been written? Come now, suppose that my whole life is a lie; prove that to be wrong and, if you are sharp enough, bring that back to the truth.
At present it holds things to be essential of which the greater part is superfluous. And even that which is not superfluous is of no significance in respect to its power of making one fortunate and blesssed.
For if a thing be necessary, it does not follow that it is a good. Else we degrade the meaning of "good," if we apply that name to bread and barley-porridge and other commodities without which we cannot live.
The good must in every case be necessary; but that which is necessary is not in every case a good, since certain very paltry things are indeed necessary. No one is to such an extent ignorant of the noble meaning of the word "good," as to debase it to the level of these humdrum utilities.
At present it holds things to be essential of which the greater part is superfluous. And even that which is not superfluous is of no significance in respect to its power of making one fortunate and blesssed.
For if a thing be necessary, it does not follow that it is a good. Else we degrade the meaning of "good," if we apply that name to bread and barley-porridge and other commodities without which we cannot live.
The good must in every case be necessary; but that which is necessary is not in every case a good, since certain very paltry things are indeed necessary. No one is to such an extent ignorant of the noble meaning of the word "good," as to debase it to the level of these humdrum utilities.
—from Seneca, Moral Letters 45
How am I to take it when a habitual liar tells me that he is lying?
In practice, I already know not to trust him, so I have learned nothing new. I’m not going to lose any sleep over the relationship between what he says and what he intends.
In theory, however, the pedant will become obsessed with what he sees as an insoluble dilemma, and he will begin to doubt the very foundations of truth and falsehood, all because he fails to distinguish between mere words and the reality they are meant to signify.
I also think of the trolley problem, a favorite conundrum dreamed up by professional ethicists, which vainly speculates on an artificially restricted scenario in order to undermine the possibility of a genuinely good choice.
Lastly, I am reminded of one of my students, an extremely bright but conceited young man, who enjoyed proclaiming how quantum physics is the proof that nothing can be proven. What can be said to someone who isn’t even aware that his obsession with being a wisenheimer has landed him in a glaring contradiction?
Common sense, which really ought to be more common, demands a s sense of scale and priority. While speculating on what might be is fascinating, living with decency in this time and place is the first concern. The “good” is not a distant abstraction, but rather an immediate task of attending to my human nature, which is revealed by deliberate reflection upon concrete experience.
So much is indeed superfluous, and it can be shocking to recognize how many aspects of life are simply supplements to happiness. Nevertheless, it is still not enough to cling to the necessary, for there are many things that are required to live, while hardly being essential for living well.
I need food, clothing, and shelter to survive for another day, and yet these will not grant me any of the virtues. Are we sure we’re teaching the right values at our fancy schools?
How am I to take it when a habitual liar tells me that he is lying?
In practice, I already know not to trust him, so I have learned nothing new. I’m not going to lose any sleep over the relationship between what he says and what he intends.
In theory, however, the pedant will become obsessed with what he sees as an insoluble dilemma, and he will begin to doubt the very foundations of truth and falsehood, all because he fails to distinguish between mere words and the reality they are meant to signify.
I also think of the trolley problem, a favorite conundrum dreamed up by professional ethicists, which vainly speculates on an artificially restricted scenario in order to undermine the possibility of a genuinely good choice.
Lastly, I am reminded of one of my students, an extremely bright but conceited young man, who enjoyed proclaiming how quantum physics is the proof that nothing can be proven. What can be said to someone who isn’t even aware that his obsession with being a wisenheimer has landed him in a glaring contradiction?
Common sense, which really ought to be more common, demands a s sense of scale and priority. While speculating on what might be is fascinating, living with decency in this time and place is the first concern. The “good” is not a distant abstraction, but rather an immediate task of attending to my human nature, which is revealed by deliberate reflection upon concrete experience.
So much is indeed superfluous, and it can be shocking to recognize how many aspects of life are simply supplements to happiness. Nevertheless, it is still not enough to cling to the necessary, for there are many things that are required to live, while hardly being essential for living well.
I need food, clothing, and shelter to survive for another day, and yet these will not grant me any of the virtues. Are we sure we’re teaching the right values at our fancy schools?
—Reflection written in 2/2013
There's literally a board/card game called the trolley problem where two teams try to convince a player to run their trolly on the other team's track. There's cards like "cute grandma", "school of ducklings", and "axe murderer" that you play on your track (chosen at random) and you argue based on them.
ReplyDeleteSo someone somewhere with some business acumen saw the silliness of it.
We...uh...may or may not own a copy.
Yes, exactly! It is ideal for a game, and it actually sounds like a very fun sort of game!
DeleteYou can privately send the link on where we can buy it, and no one will think any the less of you ;-)