In Rewriting the Soul, Ian Hacking states that “[e]ach of us becomes a new person as we redescribe the past” (68). In what sense is this true? And is this also true of a group or collective, such as a country?
We cannot literally undo what happened in the past by redescribing certain events in a more flattering or interesting way. However, we can acquire a different conscious identity by redescribing what happened in the past. We can view ourselves differently through the narratives that we construct around earlier acts, feelings, and engagements. Redescription need not be something we do or try to do. We may simply find ourselves believing that a certain redescription is appropriate or correct. How might this happen? The obvious candidates here are desires, emotions, and memory lapses (a topic that Hacking addresses in Rewriting the Soul). A person may not only convince herself of her new identity, she may convince others of it as well. Her identity may acquire a kind of social reality or independence in this way.
Can we say something similar about the way that a country describes its past? To be sure, a country does not express itself through a single voice. However, the story of a country that emerges through books and other sources involves a certain amount of description and redescription. As in the case of the individual, this does not show that a redecription can literally alter the past. But a redescription can shape the conscious identity of a country or its people. And as in the case of the individual (again), a country may succeed in convincing others that this story or identity is correct.
A question for our viewers: Can you recommend any works of fiction that deal with these themes?
Work Cited: Hacking, Ian. Rewriting the Soul: Multiple Personality and the Sciences of Memory. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995.
This article was published in What We Are Reading | One Comment so far
“Where a significant aspect of what someone does depends upon factors beyond his control, yet we continue to treat him in that respect as an object of moral judgment, it can be called moral luck.” – Thomas Nagel, “Moral Luck”
Nagel argues that moral luck threatens to undermine moral responsibility and our ordinary practices of praising and blaming people. When we view others and ourselves from ‘the external view,’ we realize that we have very little control over ourselves, our lives, and our circumstances (38). Given that moral responsibility seems to require control, we can watch it disappear before our eyes as we focus our attention upon the vast “world that we have not created” (38). But, as Nagel observes, we do not seem to be bothered by the existence of moral luck. When we view things from the external perspective, we see moral luck as deeply problematic. However, as soon as we step away from this perspective, our ordinary attitudes kick in and we revert to our previous ways.
One famous example of bad moral luck occurs in the film Sophie’s Choice. While in a concentration camp, Sophie is forced to make the following choice: (a) she can choose to keep one child (who will live), (b) or she can give both children away to the guards (who will kill them).
Most people who watch Sophie’s Choice express deep sympathy for Sophie and her situation. It seems that she will causes some ‘moral damage’ no matter what she does. But how does the choice that she eventually makes affect our moral evaluation of her? How does it affect her moral evaluation of herself and her life? Although she had no control over her situation, she made an (unavoidably) horrible choice that would stay with her forever.
Please view the clip in our video gallery.
Source: “Chapter Three: Moral Luck.” In Mortal Questions, by Thomas Nagel. pp. 24-38. Cambridge University Press (NY), 1979.
This article was published in Ethics | Add a comment
PETA has offered a $1 Million reward to the first scientist able to produce in vitro meat that is indistinguishable from real meat. PETA explains that the meat would be produced from animal stem cells that have been “placed in a medium to grow and reproduce.” The decision to support in vitro meat production was motivated by the realization that many meat-eaters are unwilling to change their carnivorous ways. As PETA explains,
“[m]ore than 40 billion chickens, fish, pigs, and cows are killed every year for food in the United States in horrific ways. Chickens are drugged to grow so large they often become crippled, mother pigs are confined to metal cages so small they can’t move, and fish are hacked apart while still conscious—all to feed America’s meat addiction. In vitro meat would spare animals from this suffering. In addition, in vitro meat would dramatically reduce the devastating effects the meat industry has on the environment.”
PETA will decide upon a winner by putting the meat to a taste and texture test. (Anyone who has consumed a vegetarian sausage lately knows that taste and TEXTURE matter.) Ten PETA judges will evaluate the in vitro chicken in the form of a fried chicken recipe from Vegcooking.com. If a scientist’s chicken receives a score of 80 or above, he or she will take home the prize.
This new alternative to ‘real’ meat promises to be tastier than what is currently available. It also promises to reduce suffering in a dramatic way. But does this form of meat production raise ethical concerns of a different variety? Does in vitro meat degrade the value of animal life? Does it imply that animals are mere ‘things’ that can be manipulated, taken apart, and used for our own purposes? Are they?
Have your say below.
Read the announcement on PETA’s site here.
This article was published in Ethics, In the News | Join the conversation
This evening we would like to share with you the English version of a poem written by Jorge Luis Borges.
Baruch Spinoza
A haze of gold, the Occident lights up
The window. Now, the assiduous manuscript
Is waiting, weighed down with the infinite.
Someone is building God in a dark cup.
A man engenders God. He is a Jew
With saddened eyes and lemon-colored skin;
Time carries him the way a leaf, dropped in
A river, is borne off by waters to
Its end. No matter. The magician moved
Carves out his God with fine geometry;
From his disease, from nothing, he’s begun
To construct God, using the word. No one
Is granted such prodigious love as he:
The love that has no hope of being loved.
This article was published in Poetry | Add a comment
The rapture is upon us!
Now as you ascend into heaven, you can have the comfort of knowing that your friends and family will receive your last words. Simply visit www.raptureletters.com to prepare in advance your post-rapture email. Your email will automatically be sent to friends and family after your sweet reunion with Jesus.
Are you afraid that you might be left behind?
Act now: accept Jesus as your savior!
For more information, view the terms and conditions in this video.
This article was published in In the News | Add a comment
Loading ...