|
(with apologies to Larry Gonick). From The Thresher (via Virulent Memes) we have this article by R.U. Sirius. Notably, Mr. Sirius writes:
But after awhile, I realized it's the people who are so fuckin' sure they know what's going on and what to do about who are straight up nuts! Well, yes. But "yes" is not the whole answer. Rather, some people act sure. This is because we all have do something. Something; only the dead can be completely passive (and possibly not even them, if you believe in an afterlife). Not to choose is, in fact, a choice (philosophical Taoists will disagree with me on this. They're wrong. That, however, is another article -- or, more likely, a whole series of articles). Of course we have incomplete knowledge; complete knowledge is not available to us mortals. The incompleteness of our knowledge, however, does not free us of moral responsibility. So, then, how should we act? In the knowledge that our information is incomplete, we ought still to act as if it were -- but at the same time, strive to complete it, knowing in advance that we will fail to do so, knowing in advance that our lack of knowledge may lead us into fatal blunders. Not to choose is to choose not to act. It means that everyone who does choose act -- whether deliberately or otherwise, on the basis of ignorance -- will have their inputs, however small, into affairs, whilst you do not. Most importantly, it means that you are witholding your knowledge, incomplete as it is, from others -- and what you know may not be known to others, may in fact prevent them from making that mistake fatal to themselves or to others. There is no gnosis, there is only communication. John "Akatsukami" Braue Thursday, April 18, 2002 |
|