Nice to have another sane voice join Substack. Good essay, keep it up!
Polarisation levels are catastrophic. When we no longer share a reality, compromise becomes near impossible. When we stop talking, violence begins.
I am extremely bearish on USA’a future. The culture is deeply sick, and Trump is just a symptom. Critical thinking skills are too low. Educational institutions were compromised, but would take decades to turn around. This has been seen coming for decades.
Love Haidt’s ‘The Righteous Mind’, everyone should read it.
IMO morality is all in our heads (obviously), and has no rational solutions. There is no right answer. You cannot get an ought from an is. Studying Longtermism and population ethics leads to so-called repugnant conclusions. Why are we intent on making people happy but not on making happy people (we’re detsroying the biosphere and our longterm chances). It’s fun to geek out on philosophy; I miss it..
Thank you Jan! This fracturing of shared reality you point at is a force multiplier for so many of our problems. I just finished reading "Careless people" by Sarah Williams, the Facebook whistleblower and it shows how this fracture has been engineered. I am convinced social media needs to become an open source public service if societal trust is to survive.
I understand your bearish sentiment- I believe things will get worse before they get better. I just hope they don't get so bad that we implode completely. As to why are we intent on these destructive pursuits- I can only imagine it is some combination of insecurities, trauma and fear of death. I keep searching for answers on that front because it will be hard to come up with a valid theory of change without it
Here's the challenge. I agree with all of this and have even participated in some of the solutions you recommend. Moreover, I've witnessed communities engaged in putting these lessons into practice in a big way. Not least of which are CSI, Reset, Burning Man etc. And yet despite all of this good work, we are where we are with MAGA. How can all of this incredibly thoughtful work for decades be so easily tossed aside or never even had a lasting impact!? It's so sad and frustrating.
Ah. Where to begin. I share your frustration too Robert. One part is that the public at large was in no position to deal with the weaponization of social media. I am currently reading "Careless people" which is a tell-all insider account of how Facebook screwed the world over and I highly recommend checking it out. The other is ecological breakdown exacerbated by exponential technology, energy and material footprint growth. In times of scarcity people turn inward and politicians find it easy to make someone the scapegoat and win elections. Meanwhile, the so called good guys can't seem to get their act together to counter these narratives. I do not know whether it is incompetence or unwillingness due to their being complicit in the system too.
I do see a new community of systems thinkers emerging though who are recognizing that we need to step up our game, build alternatives and create compelling narratives. It is a trillion dollar question whether we will be able to do this in time to avoid cataclysmic collapse. I like to think that this rot will act as impetus for change and we will manage to turn the tide eventually
“Haidt uses this extreme scenario not to normalize incest, but to expose that moral disgust often overrides logic. Even when all consideration of harm– genetic, family harmony or societal discord are removed, our instincts continue to tell us something is wrong. But is that instinct truly pointing towards inherent, inviolable morality, or just conditioning?”
The problem with this widely cited experiment lies in the assumption that all considerations of harm have actually been removed. There are further considerations and they are significant. If incest is done in secret in these circumstances, then the spiritual-aesthetic disgust it usually inspires will be undermined in these two siblings’ hearts, and as a result, they will be psychologically alienated from their culture, and more likely to cause or engage in all the other related harms in spite of prohibitions, or develop myriad antipathies to their peers. They will carry the burden of having done something odious in everyone else’s eyes, and to carry this with moral indifference would undermine their capacity for sincere identification and participation in the culture, with all the collective benefits this brings. It’s possible that the shared meanings the culture has adopted are objectively true, and/or that they conduce to the greatest human flourishing. That would mean that all violations, even those done in secret without any accountable practical harms arising, are still harmful personally and socially. This hypothetical moral validity also wouldn’t be undermined by these kinds of meanings being socially conditioned. All culturally significant moral views are conditioned before they are understood rationally.
Very thought provoking. You make some very valid points. Look forward to going through the next article in this series.
Thank you! :)
Love the articulation, esp. point #6. Great article as always Akhil.
Thank you Tummi!
Nice to have another sane voice join Substack. Good essay, keep it up!
Polarisation levels are catastrophic. When we no longer share a reality, compromise becomes near impossible. When we stop talking, violence begins.
I am extremely bearish on USA’a future. The culture is deeply sick, and Trump is just a symptom. Critical thinking skills are too low. Educational institutions were compromised, but would take decades to turn around. This has been seen coming for decades.
Love Haidt’s ‘The Righteous Mind’, everyone should read it.
IMO morality is all in our heads (obviously), and has no rational solutions. There is no right answer. You cannot get an ought from an is. Studying Longtermism and population ethics leads to so-called repugnant conclusions. Why are we intent on making people happy but not on making happy people (we’re detsroying the biosphere and our longterm chances). It’s fun to geek out on philosophy; I miss it..
Thank you Jan! This fracturing of shared reality you point at is a force multiplier for so many of our problems. I just finished reading "Careless people" by Sarah Williams, the Facebook whistleblower and it shows how this fracture has been engineered. I am convinced social media needs to become an open source public service if societal trust is to survive.
I understand your bearish sentiment- I believe things will get worse before they get better. I just hope they don't get so bad that we implode completely. As to why are we intent on these destructive pursuits- I can only imagine it is some combination of insecurities, trauma and fear of death. I keep searching for answers on that front because it will be hard to come up with a valid theory of change without it
Here's the challenge. I agree with all of this and have even participated in some of the solutions you recommend. Moreover, I've witnessed communities engaged in putting these lessons into practice in a big way. Not least of which are CSI, Reset, Burning Man etc. And yet despite all of this good work, we are where we are with MAGA. How can all of this incredibly thoughtful work for decades be so easily tossed aside or never even had a lasting impact!? It's so sad and frustrating.
Ah. Where to begin. I share your frustration too Robert. One part is that the public at large was in no position to deal with the weaponization of social media. I am currently reading "Careless people" which is a tell-all insider account of how Facebook screwed the world over and I highly recommend checking it out. The other is ecological breakdown exacerbated by exponential technology, energy and material footprint growth. In times of scarcity people turn inward and politicians find it easy to make someone the scapegoat and win elections. Meanwhile, the so called good guys can't seem to get their act together to counter these narratives. I do not know whether it is incompetence or unwillingness due to their being complicit in the system too.
I do see a new community of systems thinkers emerging though who are recognizing that we need to step up our game, build alternatives and create compelling narratives. It is a trillion dollar question whether we will be able to do this in time to avoid cataclysmic collapse. I like to think that this rot will act as impetus for change and we will manage to turn the tide eventually
I like the 6 points you made at the end! very interesting to think about
Glad you found them useful Eileen! Which of them appealed to you the most?
Love all of them but 4-6 especially!
“Haidt uses this extreme scenario not to normalize incest, but to expose that moral disgust often overrides logic. Even when all consideration of harm– genetic, family harmony or societal discord are removed, our instincts continue to tell us something is wrong. But is that instinct truly pointing towards inherent, inviolable morality, or just conditioning?”
The problem with this widely cited experiment lies in the assumption that all considerations of harm have actually been removed. There are further considerations and they are significant. If incest is done in secret in these circumstances, then the spiritual-aesthetic disgust it usually inspires will be undermined in these two siblings’ hearts, and as a result, they will be psychologically alienated from their culture, and more likely to cause or engage in all the other related harms in spite of prohibitions, or develop myriad antipathies to their peers. They will carry the burden of having done something odious in everyone else’s eyes, and to carry this with moral indifference would undermine their capacity for sincere identification and participation in the culture, with all the collective benefits this brings. It’s possible that the shared meanings the culture has adopted are objectively true, and/or that they conduce to the greatest human flourishing. That would mean that all violations, even those done in secret without any accountable practical harms arising, are still harmful personally and socially. This hypothetical moral validity also wouldn’t be undermined by these kinds of meanings being socially conditioned. All culturally significant moral views are conditioned before they are understood rationally.