I feel like this is a case of asking the wrong question. If we are asked ‘is the universe aligned with human values’ then the answer would be sadly no. People die for senseless and arbitrary reasons. We are forced to jump through countless hoops to meet our physical needs. Those who fail to jump through the hoops, often through no fault of their own, end up dying. But I don’t think this is useful knowledge, or particularly in the context of fixing society’s problems.
But while the universe does not give us an easy way to meet our goals, we still have goals. Thus, the important question is, in my view at least: what is the best way to achieve those goals? Irrespective of genetics, psychology, or any other factors causing murder, we agree that murder is bad. No matter the difficulty of meeting our physical needs, most of us nevertheless strive to meet them. To do so we create a variety of systems, be they moral frameworks, states, laws, or anything else necessary for human interaction and survival.
Note, however, that none of this accesses factors outside of our control (like say, the universe!). We take the rules of the game as a given and try to optimize for our goals with the tools we have. I don’t think focusing on the system is productive unless we have a means to change the system.
To illustrate the point: your country is an autocracy where the way to get anything done is to gain the autocrat’s favor and satisfy the interests of a narrow elite. Naturally, this system works quite poorly, and people are regularly oppressed. A reasonable observer might conclude that the problem is the system. We want to overthrow the autocrat and install a better form of government, like say, democracy. This is a good mode of thinking, primarily because it’s actually possible to do.
But suppose we have a different situation. Your country is a well functioning democracy, but prone to hurricanes that are devastating and kill large amounts of people. Here you don’t really have a choice but adapt. Sure, you could move, take precautions, buy insurance, but at the end of the day the hurricane will happen and you can’t just dial up Thor to have him call the extreme weather events off. Fixating on the unfairness of the universe is rather pointless here, because you can’t change anything.
I think real life is mainly a mix of the two. In that sense, personal responsibility is both omnipresent and nonexistent at the same time. Yes, you cannot control the circumstances of your birth, your education, your genetics, your geographic location, BUT… at the end of the day you still get to make almost every decision that matters. To live or not to live. To learn or not to learn. To help or not to help. No decision is entirely your own, but most people tend to have enough control over their actions that we consider it fair to deem them responsible for personal actions. And we certainly do often have the ability to change our own lives—for the better or worse.
I think I might ask back, “So what?” The universe is unfair, it’s amoral, it doesn’t care about good or evil, much less your survival. Should it change how we act? Make us dream less, strive less, think less?
I don’t think so.
(First response to a post on LW, woo! I felt so intimidated haha. Apologies in advance if I sound rude, inconsiderate, or if the post is just badly written. It’s my first time. Critiques welcome! I’ll be off to bed now tho, stayed up way too late writing this. Night!)
And since this is quite the extensive response, and by no means rude or badly written, let me first say thanks. :) Glad you wanted to engage and get into this with me and others here.
I guess I feel a bit uplifted from reading your comment, even when, technically, you aren’t really tackling my position head on ^ ^. It is very engaging, like a good song, a speech or something. Simple, direct examples, and a language that is easy to follow, with relatable arguments and views. A great start I would wager.
I still wonder though if you could find some useful angle for this kind of knowledge? Couldn’t it at least safeguard you from certain wrongful stances towards the Universe as a benevolent place that wants to help us? Curious if you can find something.
Thanks for the feedback! I deeply appreciate it. The praise makes my confidence go up. Glad to be able to participate in the discussion :D.
So… regarding useful angles, I thought it was somewhat self explanatory at the time, but in hindsight I think I was suffering from typical mind fallacy and failed to properly explain it. Allow me to clarify my thoughts.
I feel that in general terms your position that the universe is “fundamentally wrong” (ie: doesn’t care for human values) is rather uncontestable. While I don’t think there is necessarily a useful angle for believing this, there are countless ways that not believing it can go wrong. I think I’ll use theodicy as a very obvious example which someone else had already explored.
Theodicy is, in essence, the belief that the universe rewards good and punishes evil, so thus all outcomes are deserved. Hard work always leads to success. Bad deeds always lead to punishment. Anyone with any understanding of politics or social situations, however, would understand the horrific implications of this line of thinking. Anybody who is in poverty has nobody but themselves to blame, even if their circumstances were entirely out of their control. Those who fall sick must have deserved it, and thus don’t deserve treatment. Those with depression have earned it…
I could go on, but I don’t think I need to. This is at it’s core monstrous thinking that strips human beings of their deserved empathy, and explains away all of our problems under the veneer of fairness. Far too often it’s used to justify inaction. Why help the poor if they’re undeserving? Why speak for those without a voice, if they don’t exercise it? Why fight for those unable to defend themselves? They could’ve done something, or so the line of thinking goes. More often than not, they can’t. Meanwhile the rich and powerful pat themselves on the back for having being born into wealth and privilege. Like the divine right of kings which preceded it, the theodicy of ‘deserts’ encourages us to be complacent. It’s thus not a worthy belief.
The thought that the universe won’t protect us is hardly comforting, but I think it’s a sober belief that lends itself well to sober decisions. It reminds us of our own privileges, our circumstances, our luck. It teaches us to be grateful, but also, to be sympathetic towards the challenges of others. I think this may be the head on tackling of your position that you were referring to. If not, I apologize, I may have misread.
In any case my view is that the universe’s problems are not really a problem in the conventional sense. Rather than something that can truly be solved, they are more of a harsh reality we accept with dignity. The fact remains, however, that we can learn from the truth, and avoid many pitfalls that might come from going down irrational paths.
Thanks for your response once again! This is looking like an interesting discussion, and I’m interested in continuing. Would you mind taking this to a more private channel? Like Dms, maybe? I don’t mind posting in public, but it makes me feel a bit self conscious and I think I might express myself better in private.
that is a brilliant point, and an understandable concern indeed. I hadn’t heard about the word ‘theodicy’ before, but I’ll definitely try to remember it now.
I see your point. If the Universe is fundamentally fair, and it is inherently possible to change one’s fate and situation with effort/will alone, it becomes a moot point to ‘blame’ someone or something else.
I now see the link you made in your first comment much better,
Even though I believe your comment is great, I’ll respect your wish of course. I’ll send you a message now.
I feel like this is a case of asking the wrong question. If we are asked ‘is the universe aligned with human values’ then the answer would be sadly no. People die for senseless and arbitrary reasons. We are forced to jump through countless hoops to meet our physical needs. Those who fail to jump through the hoops, often through no fault of their own, end up dying. But I don’t think this is useful knowledge, or particularly in the context of fixing society’s problems.
But while the universe does not give us an easy way to meet our goals, we still have goals. Thus, the important question is, in my view at least: what is the best way to achieve those goals? Irrespective of genetics, psychology, or any other factors causing murder, we agree that murder is bad. No matter the difficulty of meeting our physical needs, most of us nevertheless strive to meet them. To do so we create a variety of systems, be they moral frameworks, states, laws, or anything else necessary for human interaction and survival.
Note, however, that none of this accesses factors outside of our control (like say, the universe!). We take the rules of the game as a given and try to optimize for our goals with the tools we have. I don’t think focusing on the system is productive unless we have a means to change the system.
To illustrate the point: your country is an autocracy where the way to get anything done is to gain the autocrat’s favor and satisfy the interests of a narrow elite. Naturally, this system works quite poorly, and people are regularly oppressed. A reasonable observer might conclude that the problem is the system. We want to overthrow the autocrat and install a better form of government, like say, democracy. This is a good mode of thinking, primarily because it’s actually possible to do.
But suppose we have a different situation. Your country is a well functioning democracy, but prone to hurricanes that are devastating and kill large amounts of people. Here you don’t really have a choice but adapt. Sure, you could move, take precautions, buy insurance, but at the end of the day the hurricane will happen and you can’t just dial up Thor to have him call the extreme weather events off. Fixating on the unfairness of the universe is rather pointless here, because you can’t change anything.
I think real life is mainly a mix of the two. In that sense, personal responsibility is both omnipresent and nonexistent at the same time. Yes, you cannot control the circumstances of your birth, your education, your genetics, your geographic location, BUT… at the end of the day you still get to make almost every decision that matters. To live or not to live. To learn or not to learn. To help or not to help. No decision is entirely your own, but most people tend to have enough control over their actions that we consider it fair to deem them responsible for personal actions. And we certainly do often have the ability to change our own lives—for the better or worse.
I think I might ask back, “So what?” The universe is unfair, it’s amoral, it doesn’t care about good or evil, much less your survival. Should it change how we act? Make us dream less, strive less, think less?
I don’t think so.
(First response to a post on LW, woo! I felt so intimidated haha. Apologies in advance if I sound rude, inconsiderate, or if the post is just badly written. It’s my first time. Critiques welcome! I’ll be off to bed now tho, stayed up way too late writing this. Night!)
Congrats ;) Lyrongolem on your first comment,
And since this is quite the extensive response, and by no means rude or badly written, let me first say thanks. :) Glad you wanted to engage and get into this with me and others here.
I guess I feel a bit uplifted from reading your comment, even when, technically, you aren’t really tackling my position head on ^ ^. It is very engaging, like a good song, a speech or something. Simple, direct examples, and a language that is easy to follow, with relatable arguments and views. A great start I would wager.
I still wonder though if you could find some useful angle for this kind of knowledge? Couldn’t it at least safeguard you from certain wrongful stances towards the Universe as a benevolent place that wants to help us? Curious if you can find something.
Kindly,
Caerulea-Lawrence
Hello Caerulea-Lawrence,
Thanks for the feedback! I deeply appreciate it. The praise makes my confidence go up. Glad to be able to participate in the discussion :D.
So… regarding useful angles, I thought it was somewhat self explanatory at the time, but in hindsight I think I was suffering from typical mind fallacy and failed to properly explain it. Allow me to clarify my thoughts.
I feel that in general terms your position that the universe is “fundamentally wrong” (ie: doesn’t care for human values) is rather uncontestable. While I don’t think there is necessarily a useful angle for believing this, there are countless ways that not believing it can go wrong. I think I’ll use theodicy as a very obvious example which someone else had already explored.
Theodicy is, in essence, the belief that the universe rewards good and punishes evil, so thus all outcomes are deserved. Hard work always leads to success. Bad deeds always lead to punishment. Anyone with any understanding of politics or social situations, however, would understand the horrific implications of this line of thinking. Anybody who is in poverty has nobody but themselves to blame, even if their circumstances were entirely out of their control. Those who fall sick must have deserved it, and thus don’t deserve treatment. Those with depression have earned it…
I could go on, but I don’t think I need to. This is at it’s core monstrous thinking that strips human beings of their deserved empathy, and explains away all of our problems under the veneer of fairness. Far too often it’s used to justify inaction. Why help the poor if they’re undeserving? Why speak for those without a voice, if they don’t exercise it? Why fight for those unable to defend themselves? They could’ve done something, or so the line of thinking goes. More often than not, they can’t. Meanwhile the rich and powerful pat themselves on the back for having being born into wealth and privilege. Like the divine right of kings which preceded it, the theodicy of ‘deserts’ encourages us to be complacent. It’s thus not a worthy belief.
The thought that the universe won’t protect us is hardly comforting, but I think it’s a sober belief that lends itself well to sober decisions. It reminds us of our own privileges, our circumstances, our luck. It teaches us to be grateful, but also, to be sympathetic towards the challenges of others. I think this may be the head on tackling of your position that you were referring to. If not, I apologize, I may have misread.
In any case my view is that the universe’s problems are not really a problem in the conventional sense. Rather than something that can truly be solved, they are more of a harsh reality we accept with dignity. The fact remains, however, that we can learn from the truth, and avoid many pitfalls that might come from going down irrational paths.
Thanks for your response once again! This is looking like an interesting discussion, and I’m interested in continuing. Would you mind taking this to a more private channel? Like Dms, maybe? I don’t mind posting in public, but it makes me feel a bit self conscious and I think I might express myself better in private.
Hello Lyrongolem,
that is a brilliant point, and an understandable concern indeed. I hadn’t heard about the word ‘theodicy’ before, but I’ll definitely try to remember it now.
I see your point. If the Universe is fundamentally fair, and it is inherently possible to change one’s fate and situation with effort/will alone, it becomes a moot point to ‘blame’ someone or something else.
I now see the link you made in your first comment much better,
Even though I believe your comment is great, I’ll respect your wish of course. I’ll send you a message now.