- Is it the individual?
- Is it the group/society?
The atomic method of analysis used by physical scientists and by economists strongly prefers the first. Indeed those of us in this camp observe that the notion of group or society definition of good is incoherent. There is what I think, what you think, and what she thinks...There is NO what "we" think...except as a shorthand. Further, this shorthand is always (+/- 3%) subverted.
If the individual is the core unit...then the question in politics is obviously "Who is using violence upon whom" and with what justification?
If the group is the core unit...then the question in politics is "what does the group want". I personally find this question incoherent. OBVIOUSLY groups don't have wants/needs...so who in the group are we talking about.
Americans to some extent, Libertarians and Anarchists to a great extent, believe that the answer is about the individual. AFAICT, everyone else pushes the group line.
Racists, both pro-black, and pro-white (and pro-specific asian ethnicity...there are the most of these)...are all pushing the groupist line...which is a much deeper error than the simple large government error.
Posts
1 comments:
"Ethics" as distinct from psychology, plitics, et cetera, is about the relationships between individuals and groups. What the individual does is only ethically significant in its impacts on others, both individuals and groups of individuals. And group actions are ethically significant only in their impacts on other groups and on individuals within and without the group.
That is the only useful meaning of "rights" that I have been able to find, ethical rules that protect individuals from the more concentrated power of groups, especially from government, the most powerful group of all.
Post a Comment