Compromise What is it? What do you loose? What do you gain? (last revised March 21, 2014)

Transcription

1 Ethical Philosophy Thinking Clearly in a World of Nonsense Topic for Examination on March 23, 2014 Compromise What is it? What do you loose? What do you gain? (last revised March 21, 2014) Summary The word compromise has become a dirty word in certain parts of society. But if we really think about it, what exactly does it mean? Firstly, in order to compromise, you have to have some-thing. to compromise. It must be important enough to you, to want it to be inviolable. And, you should be able to articulate it, say what it is, such as a principle, value, belief, something. Whatever it is, isn t it just like perfection, purity and unicorns, existing in our minds only, but not in the universe? Think of something and let s look at it. It seems like we compromise everything everyday in exchange for something we want. To eat at Kell s, you have to compromise many principles. But in exchange, you eat. 1

2 What is a Principle? Webster defines a principle as: (A) a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong, or (B) a basic truth or theory, or (C) an idea that forms the basis of something, or (D) a law or fact of nature that explains how something works So what would be an example of a good, strong principle? I can t think of any principle that isn t violated some time. Even the basic laws of nature don t work under certain circumstances. Ohm s Law doesn t work at zero degrees. Newton formulas don t work on the quantum level. And don t bring up mathematics = 2 is only in your head, not in the real world. Some say then there are different kinds of principles, such as legal principles, Biblical principles, constitutional principles, moral principles, etc. But name one that we follow under all circumstances, name one that we don t regularly compromise. There are no such things as Biblical principles of course, but how about the Ten Commandments? Does thou shalt not kill really mean don t kill? Don t we kill every day, and intentionally? Of course you can reinterpret the meaning of words (it only means that the Hebrews shouldn t kill each other) but isn t that just compromising? If God meant something different, why didn t he use different words? The words are clear enough thou shalt not kill! How about Constitution principles? The clear meaning of every sentence of the U.S. Constitution is compromised regularly. The interstate commerce clause for example, is now as wide as Oprah s backside. The Supreme Court violated the constitutions of both the U.S. and Florida in Bush v. Gore. About which Justice Scalia simply said get over it. Or, put in another way Shut up he explained! 2

3 How about your safety? Would you compromise your safety to get something else you want? Do you drive a car, ride a bus, eat out, buy groceries, inhale? Exactly what principles or values do you have that you would never compromise? If you can name one that you follow without fail, what does that cost you? What do we call people who live like that? Extremists? Lunatics? Fanatics? So in reality, as the old joke goes we already know what you are (a prostitute), now we re just quibbling over the price. Would You Like A Simpler World? Traditionally, the world seemed simple. The gods made you the way they wanted, your social place was set, your job was to obey, work, make sacrifices, then die and go to heaven or the underworld or something. Pretty simple! Then someone noticed that all that god and divine-right-of-kings stuff was just a scam by conmen and narcissists to control and rob people. They were supporting themselves by preying on everyone more gullible or less powerful. From then on, life was more complicated. You couldn t just thoughtlessly rely on habit, you had to watch out for human predators trying to flimflam you. Then innovation began and everything got even more complex. You couldn t just count on finding acorns, you had to make a spear and hunt. Do you have any idea how complex a caveman s spear was? Now, everything we have is based upon an understanding of some kind of complexity. 3

4 If you want the world to be simpler, you will have to sacrifice all the stuff that complexity creates. Cell phones, TV s, food and clothing, etc., everything is based upon complexity in some area. But some people like to pretend otherwise. An example is my old friend, Christian Radio talk show host Bob Dutko. Bob claims to believe two utterly incompatible things, that (A) (B) he exists and that the world is only 4,000 years old. When I point out to him that they cannot both be true, because the chemicals in his body could not have been made in only 4,000 years, he ignores me. What s up with that? Is he an ignorant dolt? Or is he just a manipulative, lying scumbag? Having listened to him for years and sent him many s, I have pretty much decided that he is an ignorant manipulative lying scumbag/dolt. He is a pretty good blend of ignorance and mean spirited exploitation of the uneducated. You can hear him mornings, 10 AM on 1330 AM, your God and Country Station. It seems like those who argue for simplicity are never willing to acknowledge that it requires a big loss. Want no government? That s just another way of saying that you like the 6 th century. Strangely, they all seem to assume it is someone else, but not themselves, who will loose all those benefits. I will be just fine in my guarded community, behind high walls with armed guards. You however, are on your own. A Case Where Life Should Be Simpler In The Bell Curve, the authors make the point that our laws have become so complex that many people can t even live in society without help. These days you need a CPA to do your taxes. 4

5 Many people run afoul of the law just because they are simply NOT SMART ENOUGH to understand its expectations. For example, I remember a yardman telling me once that if you mow people s lawns for money, the cops can t touch you. It seems to me that the complexity in the law is only designed to enrich the lawyers, stockbrokers, accountants and their wealthy clients. Which brings us right back to the first tribal chieftain and his helper priest, who promoted complexity for their benefit only. Do we compromise everything? So, Is Nothing Sacred? Well, name something and let s think about it. Marriage is sacred except that most end in divorce. Family is sacred except they re often miserable. Right to life is sacred except for executions. Christian faith is sacred except science, which we teach in schools, always contradicts it. Military service is sacred but only if you ve never served and know zero about it. The Constitution is sacred except the courts change it all the time. The law is sacred except that it does not apply to the rich and powerful. God is sacred except there are a million different versions of him/her/them etc. Children are sacred except that they are often abused and used as pawns. No cruel and unusual punishment is sacred except when we water board people. The Earth is sacred except that we can t destroy it fast enough for profit. The idea of a sacred, uncompromised pure anything is just a refusal to think. An unexamined life if not worth living. Even that seems pure and uncompromised. But, I ve ranted enough as John Kimmel would say. On a grading system from A to F, I have to give COMPROMISE an 5

6 A Without it we would still be naked hunter gatherers. Whatever you are born into does not seem like compromise, because you re used to it. Anything new does. Then you die and the kids don t see any compromise, until things change on them. What grade do you give COMPROMISE? Why? Can you think of anything you would NOT compromise? Sincerely, Sebastian Twit March 22, 2014 Turn in your answers this Sunday. Upon Later Reflection Fearing that in my inflammatory zeal I may have overstated how much we reinterpret the Constitution, I ran a draft of this rag by better educated heads. One such knowledgeable member offered the following. True, constitutional law is whatever a judge says it is. But so is all other law, as well. every judge thinks he knows what kind of interpretation of the Constitution our society, right now, will accept Because in the end, unless society (you and me) agree with the judge's interpretation, it cannot stand. Judges pretend that they don't care about public opinion. They lie. In other words, yes, we change the meaning of the words. I call that compromise. Apparently judges do not. They call it interpretation. Further, you blithely state that judges regularly violate the plain meaning of the Constitution. A violation of the Constitution is not a black-and-white thing. From generation to generation, we change our minds about what the Constitution requires. That's not bad. It's good. Our judges announce publicly in their decisions that the Constitution now means so and so. If we disagree, we reverse him or pass a law or change the Constitution. 6

7 I guess it s a matter of words. The word I use to describe that process is compromise. I don t object to it, my point is that we do it all the time. You make Scalia sound like an oaf. He's not an oaf. He's frank, and he loves attention. And you profoundly disagree with him. He's a smart lawyer, and he tries to write as persuasively as he can. And there I was just trying to be nice to Tony! Personally, I don t know squat. I rely on my knowledgeable friends and what I read. Alan Dershowitz and Vincent Bugliosi wrote books about Bush vs. Gore. They called it the worst decision in American history and a worse decision than Dred Scott and if they ever do anything like that again, the Supreme Court will never recover, and those five judges reversed their long standing positions on specific issues just for that particular person, George W. Bush, always before they had held just the opposite position on those same issues, etc. I guess it s complicated. Sebasitan Twit, High Priest of the Snake God of the Clackamas River May Her slithery name be praised. March 21, 2014 I just goggled high priest and got that pic. Check out the names and symbolism of that stuff blow up on the next page. He s like a bill-board of manipulation. What is it, Ancient Hebrew? I hope it s ancient. No, there are some New Testament references too. Probably Ancient Hebrew retrieved by Evangelical Christians. Jesus would be amused. 7

8 8