The Ominous Parallels - Tranche IX
Posted by mshupe 1 year, 1 month ago to Philosophy
Chapter 4, Excerpt 3 of 3
The Ethics of Evil
During the Weimar years, there were opponents of Hitler eager to pit their version of ethics against his, men who demanded sacrifice for the sake of some other group. None of them challenged the basic premise of the German ethics: the duty of men to live for others, the right of those others to be lived for. From the outset, the opponents of Nazism were disarmed: since they equated selflessness with virtue, they could not avoid conceding that Nazism was a form of moral idealism.
Of the Weimar groups invoking morality, the Nazis were the most fervent. Writes historian Koppel Pinson, “National Socialism, with all its moral nihilism, also knew how to appeal to the idealistic impulse for sacrifice.” So, it did. One such expression of the altruist ethics is the elevation of the group to the position of moral lawgiver. Ethical ideas, like all others, are devoid of objectivity; there is no such thing as the truth. Altruism sets the end, and the rest gives a blank check to any means to that end.
The idealism validates the amoralism. The amoralism administers the idealism. In epistemology, the combination unites infallibility and flexibility. In ethics, it unites righteousness and nihilism. Eichmann told his judges he was a faithful Kantian. To liberate humanity from intelligence, Hitler counted on irrationalism. To rid men of conscience . . . the morality of altruism. To free the world of freedom . . . the idea of collectivism. Modern philosophy turned the Germans into a nation of killers.
The Ethics of Evil
During the Weimar years, there were opponents of Hitler eager to pit their version of ethics against his, men who demanded sacrifice for the sake of some other group. None of them challenged the basic premise of the German ethics: the duty of men to live for others, the right of those others to be lived for. From the outset, the opponents of Nazism were disarmed: since they equated selflessness with virtue, they could not avoid conceding that Nazism was a form of moral idealism.
Of the Weimar groups invoking morality, the Nazis were the most fervent. Writes historian Koppel Pinson, “National Socialism, with all its moral nihilism, also knew how to appeal to the idealistic impulse for sacrifice.” So, it did. One such expression of the altruist ethics is the elevation of the group to the position of moral lawgiver. Ethical ideas, like all others, are devoid of objectivity; there is no such thing as the truth. Altruism sets the end, and the rest gives a blank check to any means to that end.
The idealism validates the amoralism. The amoralism administers the idealism. In epistemology, the combination unites infallibility and flexibility. In ethics, it unites righteousness and nihilism. Eichmann told his judges he was a faithful Kantian. To liberate humanity from intelligence, Hitler counted on irrationalism. To rid men of conscience . . . the morality of altruism. To free the world of freedom . . . the idea of collectivism. Modern philosophy turned the Germans into a nation of killers.
The clients of the state (public servants and protected groups) are now immune from prosecution. Responsible parents and political adversaries are investigated and prosecuted by Democrats in the name of saving democracy.
In truth, nationalism is just a form of association: it still implies a certain value set, etc. Nationalism isn't de facto immoral at all. One has to go into the credo of that nationalism to evaluate that. It wasn't "the Fatherland" of Nazi Germany that was the problem - it was the "Nazi" in Nazi Germany which was the problem. The same with "Mother Russia."
And BTW - philosophy for thousands of years has been a search for true principles. This isn't limited to modern day. It's just that as society has progressed and people have had more leisure time - and are willing to pay people to sit on their butts all day - we actually have the time and means to take a closer look at the matter - see Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
"Modern philosophy turned the Germans into a nation of killers."
BS. German philosophy also brought us Kant and Von Mises.
Ummm... You're espousing nationalistic principles right there...
"To say that nationalism is merely a form of association is to disregard the concept of nationalism and of association."
Do you even know what you are talking about?
"I guess higher abstractions are not your strong suit."
Try reading Sartre. He took things to the point of "higher abstraction" insomuch that it became utter nonsense. I'll leave that to you and stick with the simple and straightforward.
"Mises is an economist with philosophical principles."
Do you think economics and philosophy are separate disciplines? Von Hayek's "Road to Serfdom" would certainly disagree, as would most of Sowell's works. Economics is merely where philosophy plays out in real life.
I never said I relied on Sartre for philosophy. I pointed out the ridiculousness that is claiming "higher abstraction" to be a note of superior intellect and used Sartre as the example.
If you want to be recognized as a superior intellect, all you have to do here is make cogent points. But you're not going to get far if all you have is contempt for others.
Has Reason ever recovered? Was it given a chance to recover?
The only chance Reason has lies in the number of small groups like the one you describe in another post. Plus the linking or networking of these small groups with other groups. Otherwise, it will be a return to the dark ages.