Emotie of wijsheid als regeringsbeleid

[Fritz van Rikxoort]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Los van alle belangrijke aspecten loopt er een scheidslijn in de discussies tussen enerzijds emoties zoals vergelding of gerechtigheid en solidariteit, en anderzijds verstandelijke wijsheid in de zin van het bedenken van de consequenties van onze (re)acties. Zelfs Wim Kok "wipt" (Henk Vreeman) regelmatig heen en weer over deze scheidslijn.

Een verklaring van de menselijke emotionele impuls om te vergelden en waarom alleen de vraag of de effecten van onze (re)acties per saldo positief zijn onderdeel van regeringsbeleid zou moeten zijn is te lezen op Slate.

Fritz

Granted, the retributive impulse, though a mere instinct, is often justified in practice by its consequences. And it may be that killing Osama Bin Laden—depending on how it was done—would have on balance positive consequences. But that's a separate question, and it should be the only question that governs U.S. policy. 

http://slate.msn.com/cx/Earthling/01-09-19/Earthling.asp

Feels So Good

By Robert Wright
Robert Wright, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, is the author of The Moral Animal and Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny. Posted Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2001, at 4:00 p.m. PT
 
Why does pretty much everyone feel that it's good to punish terrorists? (...) It is an emotional reflex, a part of human nature no less than the feelings of hunger or lust.

(...)

A less trivial example: This moment in history. (...) Sometimes our politicians list the practical benefits of retaliating against terrorists, and sometimes they just declare resoundingly that evildoers must be punished. What's more, most of the popular support for retaliation seems to come from the latter source; it is grounded in the intuition that retribution is good in and of itself. President Bush says, "I want justice"—end of sentence—and the American people rise up as one.

So, in large part our policy is being driven not by reflection on the consequences of retribution; it is being driven by an emotion that once served as a good proxy for such reflection, but, in a modern social/technological/political environment, may well not.

In a column earlier this week, I discussed one reason that unreservedly following our retributive impulse—and pursuing an unnuanced "war" on terrorism—could be counterproductive. In a future column, I'll get more specific about why the current technological environment makes retaliation—retaliation of certain kinds, at least—a dubious idea. Meanwhile, I'll read outraged e-mails from people who criticize me for suggesting that retributive "justice" isn't a good thing in and of itself. (Go ahead—make my day: feedback at nonzero.org.)
 
But first let me make a prediction about those e-mails.

1) Many will consist of the mere assertion that retribution is good, rather than a defense of this assertion that starts from square one. People will say things like, "Anyone who kills 5,000 people deserves to die!"—as if this statement were self-evident. And, of course, it does seem self-evident, but the reason it seems that way is that we generally trust our retributive instinct. And the whole point of this column is that this instinct is just an instinct. It is here only because of its success in getting the genes of our ancestors into subsequent generations. Its inherent moral status is no higher than that of other such instincts—the desire to sleep with your neighbor's spouse or stuff your face with junk food. (...) Granted, the retributive impulse, though a mere instinct, is often justified in practice by its consequences. And it may be that killing Osama Bin Laden—depending on how it was done—would have on balance positive consequences. But that's a separate question, and it should be the only question that governs U.S. policy. 

2) Many of those e-mails will be from people who consider themselves Christians. This is ironic, because one of the more widely noted things Jesus said was that the retributive impulse is one instinct you shouldn't uncritically obey.  

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********