Thinking more about what I said yesterday, I've got to revise my own ideas. I don't think anyone sacrifices their life out on the basis of "gene selfishness," of course, though the mathematical incoherence of Hamiltonian "altruism" isn't the most immediate problem with the idea.
I proposed two terms to replace "altruism," itself an idea polluted with Auguste Comte's ideological positivism and materialism but, thinking more about it, I doubt those were all that much better. "Unselfishness" and even "heroic generosity" don't cut it as an adequate description of someone who either gives up their life or obviously risks giving up their life to save someone else. I don't think anyone ever did that on a mere lack of selfishness or it would be a lot more common. And I don't think that even "heroic generosity" is adequate to describe the ultimate of acts. I don't think anyone sacrifices themselves out of those, I think the only word that can come close to being adequate is the one we've been shamed out of allegedly serious consideration by the culture of positivism and scienciness, love. And I don't mean whatever some scientist telling some kind of just-so story will do to the word to show-horn it into a perversion of the emotion into natural selection or positivism or atheism. Which I know they'll do if you give them the chance.
No comments:
Post a Comment