One interpretation of certain of Nietzsche's somewhat cryptic comments is that the idea of equality -- that my life is worth as much as yours, or in a variant that no quantitative comparison can or should be made between my life's value and yours -- is a religious presumption at heart. It depends upon the background notion that we are all alike creatures of the same Creator and it will not long outlast the death of that idea.
In that spirit, Brian Leiter has recently written a paper on the connection of ideas in Nietzsche's work. You can download it via SSRN. Or read a précis on his blog at typepad.
Here's what may be the money quote (taken from that blog):
Consider the Nietzschean Trolley Problem (apologies for anachronism): a runaway trolley is hurtling down the tracks towards Beethoven, before he has even written the Eroica symphony; by throwing a switch, you can divert the trolley so that it runs down five (or fifty) ordinary people, non-entities (say university professors of law or philosophy) of various stripes (“herd animals” in Nietzschean lingo), and Beethoven is saved. For the anti-egalitarian, this problem is not a problem: one should of course save a human genius at the expense of many mediocrities. To reason that way is, of course, to repudiate moral egalitarianism. Belief in an egalitarian God would thwart that line of reasoning; but absent that belief, what would?
If nothing but religion can save moral egalitarianism, then nothing can save moral egalitarianism. For we have no basis to believe that we are all alike creatures of the same Creator -- or that a Creator exists -- and, if we are all alike creatures of the same Creator, that does not imply that we are all equal. The religious presumption is empty; it is nothing.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, Leiter's trolley operator would not know, before Beethoven wrote the Eroica symphony, that he would write it or any of his great works after it.
Leiter (not himself a theist) reconstructs the implicit connection this way, (1) There exists a God (2) through whom moral value is determined, (3) All human beings have the following property: an immortal soul bestowed by God. (4). This soul is the basis of moral equality because God deems it so. (5) Therefore, all human beings enjoy basic equality. Leiter's own view seems to be that, in our post-death-of-God time, the best argument for moral equality is an epistemological one. For all we know there are huge differences in moral value between you and I, but in our ignorance of those differences and our inability to create rules of law based on that ignorance, we sensibly revert to the default option of treating each other as equals.
DeleteI doubt that theists would be pleased with Leiter's explanation of how their belief that we are all creatures of the same creator entails that we are all of equal value. The problem is that all four of the steps leading to the conclusion are arbitrary inventions and are unrelated to one another. If (1) is true, it doesn't follow that (2), (3), or (4) is true. Leiter's explanation amounts to saying that the reason that all of us, being creatures of the same creator, entails that we are all of equal value is because I say so.
DeleteSuppose that Beethoven is on the trolley tracks after he has completed the Ninth Symphony and all the great works for which we remember him. Suppose also that he is healthy and can be expected to have years in which to create additional music. What should the trolley operator do? Be satisfied with what Beethoven has given us or sacrifice the ordinary people so that he can give us more?
ReplyDeleteLeiter's anachronistic trolley problem seems to require a time traveler. I know that if Beethoven survives he will compose great things because I have come from the 21st century, on a timeline where he did survive. To put it this way, though, may be to dissolve it. Does it make any intuitive sense, EVEN if we are acclimated to science fiction hypotheticals, to consider the moral decisions of a being who has enough power at his fingertips to travel through time but does NOT have enough power to stop, rather than just re-routing, a train? And to consider the moral decisions of THAT strange being as on a rational continuum with your own?
DeleteI wouldn't compare the power to time-travel with the power to stop a train. They are different types of powers, and one could possess one of them without possessing the other. Furthermore, time-traveling might require no power. Someone invents a vehicle that can time-travel, and time-traveling involves no more than buying a ticket for a ride on it.
DeleteThe greatest classical music composers, including Beethoven, Mozart, and Schubert composed their greatest works shortly before they died. It would be reasonable to suppose that, had they lived longer, they would have surpassed even those works. Had Beethoven lived longer, he would probably have given us not only more, but better. A symphony greater than the Ninth or string quartets greater than his last group is unimaginable, but that's only because he did not have an opportunity to write them. Should the trolley operator take that into account?
ReplyDelete