There are many unresolved disputes among physical scientists;
but there is more of a consensus about what constitutes evidence in the
physical sciences than there is among political and economic thinkers. Logic
can be formalised and logical absurdities can be demonstrated. But an argument
about whether the gulag was a price worth paying is not going to be resolved by
syllogisms – it depends upon your premises. I can ask you what you got for the
price – shortages and stagnation? You can reply that “the dictatorship of the
proletariat” is worth any price.
The gulf is colossal. Consensus seems impossible. What
separates us is our values. Is it even theoretically possible to determine what
constitutes the good?
I think we are getting metaphysical here. For me, the good
is transcendent. It exists beyond me and you. We are actually getting
theological here. Aye, there’s the rub!
The Western Tradition, with its Greek and Hebraic roots has served
us very well. Christianity, for all the failings of Christians, has an awesome
legacy, which, in my not-very-humble opinion, includes Science, Human Rights
and Democracy. For most people, including many Socialists, Darwinians and Keynesians,
these are pretty good things. I like Capitalism too; and I think it is part of
the Christian legacy, though it got going late (in view of the fact that so
many vested interests opposed it – they still do).
Have I got anywhere with this?
No comments:
Post a Comment