What is it that lies at the base of Will? Desire. Desire, an object of emotion, not of rationality. It forces me to admit that rationality is not solely sufficient to human happiness, fulfillment, or existence. Because it is desire that tells us why what's good is good. Desire is the driver, but it comes without moral force, because we can desire that which is objectively bad. By objectively, I mean referenced to some universal axiom, which can be based upon some utilitarian value. The most central, immediate, and natural to a creature being that of the will to power. If the first fact of consciousness is that a consciousness is an is, then the second is that that consciousness wills the "is" to be in a state favorable to its desires. What that desire is a matter of cultural milieu and biological impulse, but it is qualified by a rational lens, or test, if you will, that naturally arises from the creatures natural will, and that is it cannot will that which diminishes its own capacity to actualize its will; it always must "will to power" because it is intrinsic to desire is to want one's vision to be realized, to make will manifest. In fact desire is the will to actualization of capacity, and the will to power is the will of the means. Interestingly enough, sacrifice of one's own capacity to enable the survival of other capacities is moral in an absolute or collective frame, but not from a personal frame, because presumably the individual cannot profit beyond death. It is not realistic though to suggest that in most cases it is a direct trade--in most cases where one sacrifices total capacity for the continuation of others' capacity, one does so unintentionally while running the risk of losing life and limb to protect another will, without the premeditated certainty of incapacitation, but a willingness to risk the possibility. In the few instances where it is a certain sacrifice, then it is still a logical extension of capacity in an absolute sense, and the thus absolutely moral and logical, but it is irrational in the personal sense. An example of what we might call acceptable irrationality, because in the largest frame, which in thought experiments we ought to apply, because we know now in position we might find ourselves. And from behind a veil of ignorance, the highest average utility (probability factored by utility) comes from the individual's irrational choice to sacrifice for the "absolute good"--good from an absolute frame of reference. But we can dub irrational and immoral any impulse that conflicts with the principle of net capacity maximization, and since an enlargement of capacity presumes a continuity of the will, one can see a clear logical incentive for compliance in applying the golden rule as connection to the consequences of "defection" or selfishly, and logically increasing one's capacity (moral from an individual reference) but doing so at the expense of greater net capacity, through externalization of harms, then one violates the absolute morality of the act. Technically, if the organism cannot be realistically expected to live long enough to feel the negative consequences of this net inefficiency (as eternally lived humans would always be around to suffer the negative social burdens of externalities as well as the possibility, indeed the inevitability with an infinitely spanning life, of socio-political sanctions). Just one more reason why it is critical that eternal life be the innate goal of all wills, that and the natural fact that it is intrinsic that all wills should desire the greatest magnitude AND duration of their will in order to achieve the greatest "integral" of power. It is true the there is a disjunct, but it is difficult to judge, de practicum, whether the negative consequences of selfish actualization will be felt and since such behavior ultimately becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as it fuels defection in others, and since the highest personal capacity and absolute capacity can seemingly be attained through cooperation (indeed the only meaningful will, the will to immortality, half of the will to power, which must serve as first premise before the human race can will anything else).
This weighing seeds of impulse thoughts, against their rationality relative to the goals of absolute and particular morality, in descending order as a generally true statement, specifically capacity maximization, and the favoring of some impulses over others, the assignation of moral, immoral, and amoral based upon impact upon absolute and particular capacity is the fundament of all objective and natural morality.
No comments:
Post a Comment