You Cannot Implement an Ought Without Considering an Is
Hello friends, wanted to share a thought that came to me recently. Suggestions welcome.
[i]David Hume pointed out that “you cannot derive an ought from an is”, meaning you are unable to create a value judgement of how things should be from a scientific observation of how they are.
To which I would add “you also cannot implement an ought without considering an is”, meaning when implementing your vision, you must take observable laws of nature into consideration.
While people are not capable of flying on their own, they can study the laws of physics, aerodynamics, propulsion, etc. and build an airplane. And the better they have studied and implemented those disciplines, the better will the resulting airplane fly.
The worst think one can do is say “gravity goes against my religious believes” and design an airplane without taking it into consideration. Of course, such plane will not fly, no matter how much its designer wants it to or how good were his intentions.
Same applies to building civilizations. The world is Darwinian, whether you like it or not. The strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must. Life always lives at the expense of other life and he, who does not grasp this, has not taken even the first step toward honesty with himself.
It does not necessarily need to be that way, you can come up with any other model of civilization.
Yet if you fail to acknowledge the underlying human nature, your civilization will go into a nose dive, just like an airplane, when its designers decide to ignore gravity.
Meaning you can build a beautiful walled garden, but if you are unable to defend it, if you are incapable of violence, you will immediately fall victim to anybody who is.
That is happening to our western civilization right now – people became so weak and fragile that they are unable to stand up for their liberty, instead they conjure an appeasement and friendly co-existence philosophy to hide behind.[/i]
[i]David Hume pointed out that “you cannot derive an ought from an is”, meaning you are unable to create a value judgement of how things should be from a scientific observation of how they are.
To which I would add “you also cannot implement an ought without considering an is”, meaning when implementing your vision, you must take observable laws of nature into consideration.
While people are not capable of flying on their own, they can study the laws of physics, aerodynamics, propulsion, etc. and build an airplane. And the better they have studied and implemented those disciplines, the better will the resulting airplane fly.
The worst think one can do is say “gravity goes against my religious believes” and design an airplane without taking it into consideration. Of course, such plane will not fly, no matter how much its designer wants it to or how good were his intentions.
Same applies to building civilizations. The world is Darwinian, whether you like it or not. The strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must. Life always lives at the expense of other life and he, who does not grasp this, has not taken even the first step toward honesty with himself.
It does not necessarily need to be that way, you can come up with any other model of civilization.
Yet if you fail to acknowledge the underlying human nature, your civilization will go into a nose dive, just like an airplane, when its designers decide to ignore gravity.
Meaning you can build a beautiful walled garden, but if you are unable to defend it, if you are incapable of violence, you will immediately fall victim to anybody who is.
That is happening to our western civilization right now – people became so weak and fragile that they are unable to stand up for their liberty, instead they conjure an appeasement and friendly co-existence philosophy to hide behind.[/i]
Comments (5)
This is not the first time that humanity - more precisely, the West - has subjected itself to decadence and the nihilism of self-giving up.
[i]From the Hellenic period, the West was conquered by the Roman barbarians;
From the Roman period, the West had been conquered by German barbarism;
From the contemporary period, the West is being devoured by Islam.[/i]
As Hegel said:
“We learn from history that we do not learn from history.”
It does seem that we can learn only from our own experience. I was born in the soviet union, I clearly see what is going on. While those, who lived all life in the western comfort act kinda like that...
Finally, a clear and sane mind amidst the great sea of rot that is the West! We are rarer by the day...
Indeed, we live on the brink of a new "Dark Age", it only takes the final events of its inauguration to be present, so that we finally fall into the abyss.
I tell you, all those who are currently fighting for the perversion and destruction of the West, in the future, in the evil future, will worship us as saints of a past golden age!
Always great to see like-minded people!
Quoting Gus Lamarch
Not really sure about that. More likely people of the dark ages would study history and wonder, why present people did not mount any meaningful resistance, when they still had the chance. Why, for example, Trump was unable to overstep his moral boundaries and have some 10-20 main baddies arrested?...