info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Categorical Imperative, Responsibility And Ayn Rand
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Ilya Shambat
Mar 19, 2023, 11:34:40 PM3/19/23
to
Kant has said that people must act according to the categorical imperative – in such a way that, if others acted that way, it would be a universal law.
Some people may think that the way I’ve lived my life has been inconsistent with categorical imperative. They would be wrong. I contributed what I had to contribute. My contributions have been in culture and thought. Someone else’s may be in engineering or business or science.
The contributions I’ve made by translating a vast body of Russian poetry into English – the only such work in English language – is greater than contributions I made when I was in the computer industry. There are many people who can program computers; there are few people who can do what I have done. I left the computer industry because I don’t see how I can compete with a man in India who can do the same job for $6000 a year and has a master’s degree. It was a solution in 1990s, when it was the employee’s market. It is not the solution now, when it is the employer’s market. So instead of competing with others for jobs, I have done something completely original. And this has been a bigger contribution than I made when I was in the computer industry.
Now many people see creative types as bums; but they don’t know what they’re talking about. It very much takes work to produce good art. Art constitutes accomplishment as much as does business or science. Civilizations are known by their artwork. You have created a good piece of art, you have made a contribution to the civilization.
When I dropped out of the corporate world in 2000, people were accusing me of leaving reality. No; I left an adaptation. There is a lot more to reality than the adaptation. There is the Sun. There is Planet Earth. There are other societies and civilizations. Some think that doing this was irresponsible; in fact it wasn’t. Responsibility presupposes knowledge and wisdom. I gained a lot of both during that time. This allows me to make more informed choices – choices that, being informed, actually stand to be responsible.
One thing I found out was that what is thought of as responsibility, and what responsibility actually is, differ greatly. There are people who equate responsibility with reckless consumption. In fact reckless consumption is more responsible than even drug addiction. The drug addict hurts himself and people who love him; the reckless consumer hurts everyone. I do not advocate doing away with business or technology. Many good things have come out of both, and we benefit from all of the above all the time. I advocate improved business practices and more responsible treatment of the environment. People can fulfil their material needs and wants in a way that is less destructive to nature. The solution is not leaving the civilization or going off the grid. Most people will want to stay in the civilization. The solution is moving the civilization to use of better technologies – such as one I’ve promoted for a long time, http://htnresearch.com .
When responsibility is incorrectly defined, we have many undesirable results. True responsibility is about leaving the world a better place than you have found it. I have done a lot toward that outcome, and I recommend that others do as well. That way the categorical imperative is actually being served.
As for Kant’s enemy Ayn Rand, while she was correct to affirm business and technology, she was wrong to have no value for nature. Nature contains in it things of greater intricacy and beauty than anything that people have known to devise. Both nature and civilization are amazing accomplishments, and both deserve to be treated with respect and care. The solution is not moving away from the civilization; it is about using human intelligence to fulfil the civilization in a way that is not destructive to nature. That way intelligence fulfils its function of making the world a better place, and true progress is served.
Some people may think that the way I’ve lived my life has been inconsistent with categorical imperative. They would be wrong. I contributed what I had to contribute. My contributions have been in culture and thought. Someone else’s may be in engineering or business or science.
The contributions I’ve made by translating a vast body of Russian poetry into English – the only such work in English language – is greater than contributions I made when I was in the computer industry. There are many people who can program computers; there are few people who can do what I have done. I left the computer industry because I don’t see how I can compete with a man in India who can do the same job for $6000 a year and has a master’s degree. It was a solution in 1990s, when it was the employee’s market. It is not the solution now, when it is the employer’s market. So instead of competing with others for jobs, I have done something completely original. And this has been a bigger contribution than I made when I was in the computer industry.
Now many people see creative types as bums; but they don’t know what they’re talking about. It very much takes work to produce good art. Art constitutes accomplishment as much as does business or science. Civilizations are known by their artwork. You have created a good piece of art, you have made a contribution to the civilization.
When I dropped out of the corporate world in 2000, people were accusing me of leaving reality. No; I left an adaptation. There is a lot more to reality than the adaptation. There is the Sun. There is Planet Earth. There are other societies and civilizations. Some think that doing this was irresponsible; in fact it wasn’t. Responsibility presupposes knowledge and wisdom. I gained a lot of both during that time. This allows me to make more informed choices – choices that, being informed, actually stand to be responsible.
One thing I found out was that what is thought of as responsibility, and what responsibility actually is, differ greatly. There are people who equate responsibility with reckless consumption. In fact reckless consumption is more responsible than even drug addiction. The drug addict hurts himself and people who love him; the reckless consumer hurts everyone. I do not advocate doing away with business or technology. Many good things have come out of both, and we benefit from all of the above all the time. I advocate improved business practices and more responsible treatment of the environment. People can fulfil their material needs and wants in a way that is less destructive to nature. The solution is not leaving the civilization or going off the grid. Most people will want to stay in the civilization. The solution is moving the civilization to use of better technologies – such as one I’ve promoted for a long time, http://htnresearch.com .
When responsibility is incorrectly defined, we have many undesirable results. True responsibility is about leaving the world a better place than you have found it. I have done a lot toward that outcome, and I recommend that others do as well. That way the categorical imperative is actually being served.
As for Kant’s enemy Ayn Rand, while she was correct to affirm business and technology, she was wrong to have no value for nature. Nature contains in it things of greater intricacy and beauty than anything that people have known to devise. Both nature and civilization are amazing accomplishments, and both deserve to be treated with respect and care. The solution is not moving away from the civilization; it is about using human intelligence to fulfil the civilization in a way that is not destructive to nature. That way intelligence fulfils its function of making the world a better place, and true progress is served.
0 new messages