Skip to main content

Absolute fudge

KBJ takes on Jonah Goldberg's question from NRO's The Corner here. Very interesting reading. Oh, and the question? Are liberals or conservatives more likely to say that "the ends justify the means?" I think Jackson is spot on in his conclusions:
Liberals are more likely than conservatives to allow the ends to justify the means. We might say that while most liberals believe in rights, they take these rights to be defeasible or overridable by sufficiently good ends. Conservatives, it seems to me, are more likely to resist such overriding. If I’m right, then the average conservative is closer than the average liberal to the absolute deontologist [some things are always wrong, no matter what] end of the spectrum.
Liberals are more likely to fudge absolutes (they're so oppressive!), even when presented in the form of human rights (the penumbras and permutations of Roe, anyone?), but Jackson is right to point out that they don't have a monopoly on the practice. The phenomenon of one's "sense of justice overtaking charitable good sense" is common to both, but liberalism has greater conceptual problems with absolutes than does conservatism. Being Rationalists and, I would argue, too confident of their thinking ability, liberals can too easily seek to rationalize anything. Conservatives can fall in this trap as well, but it is harder. This is a small part of why I will choose the 'stupid party' over the 'evil party' every time. This is a big subject, so I can't say exactly where I fall. There's too many issues to consider. Probably I'm a non-absolute deontologist, with a few strong deontologist leanings. I do tend to fall into the middle of the pack on most political scales, albeit with a strong desire to see life, family and community upheld over bureaucracy, "professionalization" and ideology. That makes me mildly right wing over all and very right wing on a few things.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wordpress

My move to Mac has been very happy except for two issues - gaming and blogging. For websurfing and multimedia, a Mac is of course a terrific machine. Games on the Mac platform are often ports of games made for the larger PC market and that means a Mac gamer will have to wait for the port. I'm not a heavy gamer by any means but I am very happy that the Mac port of Civilization 4 is finally here. Well, my copy isn't here quite yet - but it has been ordered and ought to be here soon. The blogging issue is more complicated. I'm not fond of writing my posts in a browser window. This goes back to when I was first blogging and I lost one or two large posts into the ether. After that I moved to w.bloggar - a great little app that let me compose on my desktop and then click send when all was said and done. I have not been able to recreate that experience on my Mac, and not for a lack of trying! I looked at Marsedit , but that forces you to compse while staring at a bunch of HMT...

Da Vinci: It bleats, it leads

The trouble with The DaVinci code is certainly this : the fundamentals of the Christian creed can be summarized in a few sentences easily learned by schoolchildren and recited aloud from memory by the whole congregation on Sunday. They are great mysteries to be sure - Trinity, incarnation, redemption, salvation, crucifixion, resurrection - but they are simple enough to explain. Contrast that with the account Mr. Brown offers of a centuries-long fraud, sustained by shadowy groups, imperial politics, ruthless brutality and latterly revealed by a secret code "hidden" in one of the world's most famous paintings. The Christian Gospel offers a coherent, comprehensible account of reality that invites the assent of faith. It requires a choice with consequences. Mr. Brown's dissent from Christianity offers a bewildering and incredible amalgam of falsehoods and implausibilities, painting a picture of a world in which the unenlightened are subject to the manipulations of the fe...