Equilibrium” to be able to understand somewhat the propulsion of his writing. There is a particular beauty and weave of his argument, how one thing (commonsense) leads to another (ethics) and before and beyond. I am beginning to see the logic, where he is going and what he demands of us readers.
Because I think he does. Saul if nothing else, demands we consider our passivity in the light of bigger issues. He very much makes the challenge that we, individuals (and readers!) are part of this broader society and we have the responsibility to address these broader issues. I don’t think for one moment Saul is writing to propound theory. He demands more of himself and us. Who else but those conscious of these methods of change are able to make the progress necessary?
I glean from Saul this: Most of us are able to ask ourselves the ethical questions. And then, they demand continual, sustained questioning. He says to ask is to admit we have a need and obligation to keep asking and finally to act in accordance with our answers.
This is the essence of ethics!
“To ask and not to go on is to admit personal failure as an ethical being. And not to act is to embrace self-loathing. Better to not ask in the first place.”
So to me, Saul comes down in two ways: we can read, look at him as an interesting theorist, or we can read and look inward (concerning our embrace of ethics to the personal) and ‘act’ in accordance with what we find and understand.
I am a practical person. I look for usable ideas of change. I use these, or try to, to change myself and the way I look at things. It’s been a hit and miss, but Saul gives good head stuff here.
Saul says that marginalization is tied to our idea of progress and progress is tied to our idea of knowledge. But knowledge is meant to draw us closer to an integrated view of reality. Knowledge which distances is (Socrates here) “The ignorance that causes bad things….the most disgraceful sort of stupidity”. It belongs to those who don’t know but think they do.
Further on in “Ethics”, Saul quotes Jung: “nothing has a more divisive and alienating effect upon society than…moral complacency and lack of responsibility.”
Yesterday I got a phone call from a friend, soliciting my views on McCain’s choice of VP. This fellow is a friend, but is too timid and passive to consider any new approach to our social questions. He and I both have been involved in local politics for years. The difference is he still looks for solutions within the framework of the comfortable certainties of what he knows. And what he (and I) have been force-fed all our adult lives.
He keeps having hope and because of this he remains essentially passive. he keeps thinking that the next ‘progressive’ candidate will magically come up with the way out of here, ‘here’ being the morass of self-interests that our politicians not so surprisingly put into effect as soon as they are elected. Usually this means that they no more see the ‘other’, nor do they have any real solutions to effect change.
I used to be surprised, too. Now, I’m not. We are asking the wrong questions, we are complacent with the same material, yet we are surprised at the same results.
Now, I am beginning to believe these issues surrounding us are our inability to apply ethics to the particular questions…We don’t ask. We live passively and we expect others to make those changes that we vaguely ”want”.
Living with ethics means embracing uncertainty. We don’t like that. It makes us uncomfortable. It shakes our complacency. It makes us vaguely guilt- ridden, which we shove down with certainties that don’t answer at all, but comfort us because we are creatures of habit.
Ethics and ethical considerations can be very inconvenient and uncomfortable. It is about a constant questioning what is before us, what is presented to us, it is the constant choice of life. Saul says we are both spectators and participants. The choice we make requires a balance of both roles. This isn’t easy, but there isn’t….if we want to be ethical about life, any way around it. This role demands that we embrace doubt and that we aren’t passive. Not really easy for what we are ‘trained’ for in society…but IF we are thinking deeply about all before us….we have no other choice.
Ethics as a ‘living thing’ means living with uncertainty. ” ‘Embracing ethics’ means putting uncertainty in the center of our lives.”
We all want certainty in our lives, something to hold onto. The certainties of love/affection/food/shelter, these basic certainties.
However, we live with uncertainty all around us. Politics and whether they in their outcome will serve society. The uncertainty that our individual voices mean crap to the elites. Our ethical considerations are FULL of doubt, and ethical consideration is an important demonstration of us as responsible individuals…citizens in a society that is made up, this precious democracy, of us, not a handful of power brokers, the managers of society.
Finally Saul says this: “The built-in instability of debate, doubt and ethics is precisely the key to our success. The more we marginalize them, the more fragile that is, unstable, democracy becomes.”
We need more doubt, acknowledge the uncertainties that make us think and rock our world, and more ethical considerations.
Then we will be on a path towards workable, embraceable solutions for the bigger society. And in embracing this, we will be transforming ourselves for the better.
Jane
