Quoting Julie Krueger <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>: > The Gov of NJ (I think it was) recently said "I have had people come up to > me and tell me that they don't agree with what I'm doing but they know it > has to be done". Is there anywhere in the philosphical universe where such > a statement makes sense? > > Julie Krueger > Yes, I have heard humans utter things like that. What I think they mean is that while they find course of action P morally wrong or prudentially questionable, they are willing to engage in P, or support P, on grounds they believe to trump grounds for not-P. Other locutions in the same category are: "It would be morally wrong to arrest the pope but it nevertheless must be done" and "Capital punishment is morally wrong but we need it for its detterance value." Socrates would have difficulties understanding such claims since he is convinced that nobody knowingly does wrong. I believe we can save Socrates's theory and shed some light on these utterances by interpreting them as straightforward claims to moral and/or prudential rightness. For example, the claim that it is morally (and/or prudentially) wrong to arrest the pope but it must be done would be interpreted simply as the claim that arresting the pope is morally (and/or prudentially) right, justifiable in the given circumstances. (And all moral judgements involve circumstances since the object of moral assessment is a maxim or dispositions to abide by certain maxims.) Walter O MUN > > > 2010/9/17 <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx> > > > NOT *MY* View. As McEvoy agrees, I only believe TRUE THINGS. But > > Nietzsche's views, as analysed by Prof. Gemes. > > > > --- > > > > Speranza--Bordighera > > > > 1878 > > > > MM 34 Wird die Wahrheit nicht dem Leben, dem Besseren feindlich? Eine > Frage > > scheint uns die Zunge zu beschweren und doch nicht laut werden zu wollen: > > ob > > man bewusst in der Unwahrheit bleiben könne? oder, wenn man diess müsse, > ob > > da nicht der Tod vorzuziehen sei? > > > > HAH 34 Does not truth become an enemy of life, an enemy of what is better? > > A > > question seems to weigh down our tongues, and yet not want to be uttered: > > whether one is capable of consciously remaining in untruth, or, if one had > > to do so, whether death would not be preferable? (Hollingdale?s > > translation) > > > > > > Fruhjahr- Herbst 1881 > > > > Aphorism 9.478 KSA > > > > es giebt keine Vergeltung keine Weisheit keine Güte keine Zwecke keinen > > Willen: um zu handeln, mußt du an Irrthümer glauben; und du wirst noch > nach > > diesen Irrthümern handeln, wenn du sie als Irrthümer durchschaut hast. > > > > in order to act you must believe in error; and you will still act in > > accordance with these errors, even when you have recognized them as > errors. > > (My translation of the relevant part) > > > > > > Fruhjahr- Herbrt 1881 > > > > Aphorism 9.503 KSA > > So entsteht im Weisen der Widerspruch des Lebens und seiner letzten > > Entscheidungen; sein Trieb zur Erkenntniß hat den Glauben an den Irrthum > > und > > das Leben darin zur Voraussetzung. Leben ist die Bedingung des Erkennens. > > Irren die Bedingung des Lebens und zwar im teifsten Grunde Irren. Wissen > um > > das Irren hebt es nicht auf! Das ist nichts Bitteres! Wir müssen das Irren > > lieben und pflegen, es ist der Mutterschooß des Erkennens. > > > > > > Knowledge of errors does not abolish them! (My translation of the relevant > > part) > > > > Herbst 1881 > > > > Aphorism 9.581 KSA > > Ach, nun müssen wir die Unwahrheit umarmen und der Irrthum wird jetzt erst > > zur Lüge, und die Lüge vor uns wird zur Lebensnothwendigkeit! > > > > Ah, now we must embrace untruth, and now the error at last becomes a lie, > > and lying to ourselves becomes a necessity of life. (My translation) > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html