Education or Legislation? (Part 4), 7-3-2010

[Continued from Education or Legislation? (Part 3), 7-3-2010. sch 2/9/23.] 

 I read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics as promoting the consensus I wrote of in Part 3. We must determine the virtues we demand of American citizens. We all have an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I see us failing to appreciate the liberty of our neighbors when contemplating our own liberty. The same applies to the pursuit of happiness. When our liberty and/or pursuit of happiness conflicts with the liberty and/or pursuit of happiness of others, then a compromise will be necessary. I believe that compromise can be accomplished only if we have a consensus about ethical values.

Some books I think needing mentioned here: Albert Camus' The Rebel (nihilism versus life; totality versus unity); John Stuart Mills' On Liberty, and John Locke's Second Treatise on Government.

I remain concerned that fashioning any program for educating people about the virtues will fail between the pietistic evangelicals and the hedonistic libertarians. Much persuasion shall be needed, standing fast is the only means of achieving consensus. Ask of anyone objecting what virtues they would promote. Then sort the stupid from the relevant objections.

So while I find legislation has its uses, I question its general efficiency. I doubt many lawyers think highly of any legislation. I see education has a broader and deeper effect on the population, but lacks the easy appeal to the public's emotions. Ethics cannot be imposed by legislation. Ethics imposed lacks the organic tie with the citizenry – see, again, the Prohibition Era. Legislation can best serve civil society by protecting it from the bad acts of the intemperate.

The intemperate person, as we said, is not prone to regret, since he abides by his decision [when he acts]. But every incontinent is prone to regret. That is why the truth is not wha twe said in raising the puzzle, but in fact the intemperate person is incurable, and the incontinent curable... And in general incontinence and vice are of different kinds. For the vicious person does not recognize that he is vicious, whereas the incontinent person recognizes he is incontiennt.

Nicomachean Ethics, Book VII, Chapter 8, §1. 

I have my doubts about incurable vice might be. There in lies the difference between one raised a Baptist in the 20th Century and a pre-Christian Greek Philosopher. Redemption exists in my mind. I find no trace of redemption – so far – in Aristotle's world.

 sch

 [Continued in Education or Legislation? (Part 5), 7-3-2010. sch 2/9/23.]