I just finished "12 rules for life" by Jordan Peterson and I am delighted that someone encourages people to adopt general moral values, instead just adapt an play along with the rules, as many recent US books for self-help advocate.
It seems that US americans, the most individualistic,rebellious and libertarian nation just discover the Romanian proverb "Bowed head is not cut by the sword" and the Iranian one "Kiss the hand that you cannot bite". This is a sign of stagnation and a road towards the loss of liberties, because the changes in society were made by people who had strong values like Martin Luther King or the Founding Fathers.
This vaccine shot of "secular" religion provided by the Canadian Dr. Peterson, might boost the social immune system against lie and injustice.
I will explain this below.
The main controversy is about first chapter "Stand up straight and with your shoulders back" in which he demonstrates the existence of hierarchies in nature, well before humans used social hierarchies.
Unfortunately he uses a political language from the left such as "1%", and it seems to me that the "1%" will justify their hold to privileges using Dr. Peterson philosophy as nazi's were inspired from Nietzsche or communist used Karl Marx.
I agree that in nature exist an innate hierarchy system that is determined by a clear criterion. For example the biggest and strongest walrus is rewarded with the biggest harem.
But in human hierarchies,other hidden criteria operate.
For example in medical hierarchy the best doctors are on the top? Or at least the must compassionate are on the top?
If we study medical hierarchy in 1847 Europe we can discover top doctors of the time refused to wash their hands,when Ignaz Semmelweis proved that many pregnant women died at birth due to diseases transmitted by doctors.
The arguments of top doctors? Gentlemen don't transmit diseases. Proofs are unscientific according with the current theory.
We can excuse the medics from 19 for their ignorance of the germ theory but we cannot forgive them for the indifference towards pregnant women and babies. The washing of hands with chlorine or alcohol was a small effort that could save hundreds of lives.
So if the hierarchy is the best way to solve thing and distribute resources, why it didn't work?
Why the top of medical hierarchy in was not filled with the smartest and most compassionate doctors?
Hierarchies work in nature because they are always challenged.
The walrus has to defend every day its harem, once he is not able to it falls down the latter.
In human hierarchies sometimes the position is inherited or it is given from top down.
For example: the son of the king is inheriting the hierarchy of his father. His father conquered enemies and made alliances, and the member of these alliances want to maintain the status quo and accept the king son despite his flaws.(The cardinal of Richelieu said that a new king must not change anything if he wants to stay in power)
The criterion for staying in top of hierarchy changed from father, who rise up because he was the best warrior, to the son who must be a keeper of status quo.
The human social hierarchy depends of alliances.
The one who challenges the hierarchy challenges an alliance of individuals not an individual.
A guy trying to overthrow the king will affect the livelihood of dukes and counts.
Ignaz Semmelweis with his discovery challenged the competence of his fellow doctors. Seeming less competent they could lose social status and maybe have less patients.
Unchallenged hierarchies are fatal for themselves and for community.
The best example of unchallenged hierarchy who destroyed it self is the french aristocracy.
A nobleman mission in Middle Age was to defend the realm, and only the smartest and strongest military men resisted.
But the state grew and kings army took over the military matters.
Now the noblemen had to dedicate only to administration of the domains and to the pleasures.
Soon they delegated the administration of their estates and focused on pleasures.
The title inherited from the father assured a good life without dirtying hands with lower occupations such as commerce and they were not bothered with taxes.
The number of these parasites grew as Louis 15 started to sell titles for money.
Of course we know that what happen a famine triggered French Revolution and most of the noblemen lost their head to the guillotine or fled.
How to handle a hierarchy?
Against a hierarchy you can either submit and perpetuate the actual state, fight against and be crushed or act on horizontally and convince the other member of society that the hierarchy is putrid and unfair and must be changed.
Radio Free Europe did this in Eastern Europe and because of that the communist regimes fell swiftly.
The social media did the same thing in Arab spring.
In both cases hierarchies didn't work anymore: they didn't provided security and they were followed by inertia.Once the social inertia consumed itself they fell.
Universal moral values limit the power that a hierarchy has upon us by creating a unity that transcends group divisions, and making people strive for a common good.
For example in World War II they were people who ignored hierarchical orders and did good things. Viorica Agarici stood in front of a death train and force it to be open, and people within to receive water, catholics smuggled jewish children from Warsaw ghetto, German military commanders refused to blow up Paris, doctors in soviets camps helped the prisoners to survive.Even a Himmler henchmen declared that it was very hard for him to shot a SS member who refused to shot some civilians.
Nicolae Steinhardt during his imprisonment in a Romanian communist prison, said that a guard has told him, that if they would do everything what was ordered to, within a week they would be dead.
Of course punishments can make you choose between defending values or die: in 1953 a riot broke out in East Berlin, and the soviet soldiers who maintained order there were shot because they didn't shoot the demonstrators.
As any big religion or nation can testify universal moral values strengthen make the society cooperate towards against abusive hierarchies.
The enemy of universal moral values is tribalism where small group of people tied by blood relations, by narrow ethnics or by small interest cooperate to wipe out others.
Unfortunately the politicians are good at making tribes.
It seems that US americans, the most individualistic,rebellious and libertarian nation just discover the Romanian proverb "Bowed head is not cut by the sword" and the Iranian one "Kiss the hand that you cannot bite". This is a sign of stagnation and a road towards the loss of liberties, because the changes in society were made by people who had strong values like Martin Luther King or the Founding Fathers.
This vaccine shot of "secular" religion provided by the Canadian Dr. Peterson, might boost the social immune system against lie and injustice.
I will explain this below.
The main controversy is about first chapter "Stand up straight and with your shoulders back" in which he demonstrates the existence of hierarchies in nature, well before humans used social hierarchies.
Unfortunately he uses a political language from the left such as "1%", and it seems to me that the "1%" will justify their hold to privileges using Dr. Peterson philosophy as nazi's were inspired from Nietzsche or communist used Karl Marx.
I agree that in nature exist an innate hierarchy system that is determined by a clear criterion. For example the biggest and strongest walrus is rewarded with the biggest harem.
But in human hierarchies,other hidden criteria operate.
For example in medical hierarchy the best doctors are on the top? Or at least the must compassionate are on the top?
If we study medical hierarchy in 1847 Europe we can discover top doctors of the time refused to wash their hands,when Ignaz Semmelweis proved that many pregnant women died at birth due to diseases transmitted by doctors.
The arguments of top doctors? Gentlemen don't transmit diseases. Proofs are unscientific according with the current theory.
We can excuse the medics from 19 for their ignorance of the germ theory but we cannot forgive them for the indifference towards pregnant women and babies. The washing of hands with chlorine or alcohol was a small effort that could save hundreds of lives.
So if the hierarchy is the best way to solve thing and distribute resources, why it didn't work?
Why the top of medical hierarchy in was not filled with the smartest and most compassionate doctors?
Hierarchies work in nature because they are always challenged.
The walrus has to defend every day its harem, once he is not able to it falls down the latter.
In human hierarchies sometimes the position is inherited or it is given from top down.
For example: the son of the king is inheriting the hierarchy of his father. His father conquered enemies and made alliances, and the member of these alliances want to maintain the status quo and accept the king son despite his flaws.(The cardinal of Richelieu said that a new king must not change anything if he wants to stay in power)
The criterion for staying in top of hierarchy changed from father, who rise up because he was the best warrior, to the son who must be a keeper of status quo.
The human social hierarchy depends of alliances.
The one who challenges the hierarchy challenges an alliance of individuals not an individual.
A guy trying to overthrow the king will affect the livelihood of dukes and counts.
Ignaz Semmelweis with his discovery challenged the competence of his fellow doctors. Seeming less competent they could lose social status and maybe have less patients.
Unchallenged hierarchies are fatal for themselves and for community.
The best example of unchallenged hierarchy who destroyed it self is the french aristocracy.
A nobleman mission in Middle Age was to defend the realm, and only the smartest and strongest military men resisted.
But the state grew and kings army took over the military matters.
Now the noblemen had to dedicate only to administration of the domains and to the pleasures.
Soon they delegated the administration of their estates and focused on pleasures.
The title inherited from the father assured a good life without dirtying hands with lower occupations such as commerce and they were not bothered with taxes.
The number of these parasites grew as Louis 15 started to sell titles for money.
Of course we know that what happen a famine triggered French Revolution and most of the noblemen lost their head to the guillotine or fled.
How to handle a hierarchy?
Against a hierarchy you can either submit and perpetuate the actual state, fight against and be crushed or act on horizontally and convince the other member of society that the hierarchy is putrid and unfair and must be changed.
Radio Free Europe did this in Eastern Europe and because of that the communist regimes fell swiftly.
The social media did the same thing in Arab spring.
In both cases hierarchies didn't work anymore: they didn't provided security and they were followed by inertia.Once the social inertia consumed itself they fell.
Universal moral values limit the power that a hierarchy has upon us by creating a unity that transcends group divisions, and making people strive for a common good.
For example in World War II they were people who ignored hierarchical orders and did good things. Viorica Agarici stood in front of a death train and force it to be open, and people within to receive water, catholics smuggled jewish children from Warsaw ghetto, German military commanders refused to blow up Paris, doctors in soviets camps helped the prisoners to survive.Even a Himmler henchmen declared that it was very hard for him to shot a SS member who refused to shot some civilians.
Nicolae Steinhardt during his imprisonment in a Romanian communist prison, said that a guard has told him, that if they would do everything what was ordered to, within a week they would be dead.
Of course punishments can make you choose between defending values or die: in 1953 a riot broke out in East Berlin, and the soviet soldiers who maintained order there were shot because they didn't shoot the demonstrators.
As any big religion or nation can testify universal moral values strengthen make the society cooperate towards against abusive hierarchies.
The enemy of universal moral values is tribalism where small group of people tied by blood relations, by narrow ethnics or by small interest cooperate to wipe out others.
Unfortunately the politicians are good at making tribes.
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu