Terri continues to live, and much hope is pinned on her kidneys. As long as they
are still functioning, the other organs have a chance to recover, should the President
give her a reprieve. Strange, that our prayers for deliverance should involve something so
earthy, so infantile, as urine. A humbling thing it is to consider that as we came into the world, so we
shall all leave it. In our previous post we talked about morality flows from power, and the importance
of fear.
This is not a favorite topic of discussion, either among DA or among our judicial activist foes. It is
the proverbial elephant in the living room, which we all would all rather ignore. President Bush, in his
2nd inaugural address, contrasts fear and freedom, (or oppression and freedom)
first in his appeal to other nations, and later in his
request for Social Security reform:
We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation:
The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom,
which is eternally right. ...
By making every citizen an agent of his or her own destiny,
we will give our fellow Americans greater
freedom from want and fear,
and make our society more prosperous and just and equal.
With such bad connotations, who would ever want to find something vital in "fear"?
Indeed, we have 150 years of critique from the likes of Nietzsche and Wagner and Freud
on the dangers of exalting the virtues of any suffering, fear, or weakness of any kind.
If life is a poker game, then don't wear your heart on your sleeve!
Why would DA take on such a Quixotic crusade?
A very good question. A question applicable to the Congressional efforts to save Terri's life.
Applicable to President Bush's attempt to establish Middle East democracy. Or ending North
Korean tyranny. That is, there appears to be little to gain, and everything to lose.
But I gave myself away. Once the main stream media "Iraqi quagmire" had dried up after the elections,
and the "everything to lose" argument no longer held water, suddenly the "little to gain" argument
started sounding a bit shrill. Not just Afghanistan, Palestinian Authority and Iraq held elections,
but Saudi Arabia did, followed by Egyptian and Lebanese revolt. Even the worst critics of an Iraqi
invasion--Le Monde, Der Spiegel--started
asking "was Bush right?" What they couldn't get themselves to ask was "How did Bush know it would work?"
Because if Bush knew all along, it wasn't a Quixotic crusade, it was the real thing. And if was the
real thing, then somewhere in their calculation was a big mistake, something more major than finances
at WorldCom. And that overlooked factor frightens them too much to speak openly of it. They fear.
What is that factor? Freud and Nietzsche attribute it to God. God is the object of our primitive
fears. But they are johnny-come-latelys by over 2000 years. Titus Lucretius Carus, writing about 50BC
in De Rarum Natura, gave a
stirring defense of materialism, as developed ~500 BC by Democritus and greatly expanded by
Epicurus ~400BC, saying:
(I:50)When human life lay grovelling in all men's sight, crushed to the earth under the dead weight of
superstition whose grim features loured menacingly upon mortals from the four quarters of the sky,
a man of Greece was first to raise mortal eyes in defiance, first to stand erect and brave the challenge.
Fables of the gods did not crush him, nor the lightning flash and the growling menace of the sky.
Rather, they quickened his manhood, so that he, first of all men, longed to smash the constraining
locks of nature's doors. The vital vigor of his mind prevailed. He ventured far out beyond the flaming
ramparts of the world and voyaged in mind throughout infinity. Returning victorious, he proclaimed
to us what can be and what cannot; how a limit is fixed to the power of everything and an immovable
frontier post. Therefore superstition in its turn lies crushed beneath his feet, and we by his
triumph are lifted level with the skies. One thing that worries me is the fear
that you may fancy
yourself embarking on an impious course, setting your feet on the path of sin. Far from it. More often
it is this very superstition that is the mother of sinful and impious deeds. Remember...Iphigeneia...
Such are the heights of wickedness to which men are driven by superstition.
It has been the contention of materialism since its founding that fear is the one thing that holds us
back from conquering infinity, that fear is the origin and binding chain of superstition, defined by
Lucretius as a faith in the activity of the gods. To translate that into 20th century psychobabble, fear is
what holds you back from living up to your potential. Ergo, fear is always and everywhere a bad thing.
I cannot emphasize enough the direct connection between "fear of fear" and materialism. The examples
become too plentiful to begin to ennumerate. Materialism is all about "progress" defined as "overcoming
limitations" that previous generations "feared". Education is no longer about content, but about "actualizing
potential" by "building self-esteem". Security is no longer about the preservation of life, but about
"freedom from fear". Sport is no longer about teamwork or building character, but steroids (to overcome
material limitations) and drugs (to overcome mental limitations, ie, fear.) Established religion falls all over
itself to avoid offence, dressing up their Lord as Venus, the god of love. Activists of all flavors
smear their opposition by inventing Freudian fears, "phobias".
But suppose, just suppose that there are real limits in all areas of life. Children shouldn't play
in traffic. Teenagers shouldn't experiment with mind-bending drugs. Adults shouldn't be promiscuous or
ignore familial responsibilities. Governments shouldn't defend their rule by oppression, burdensome taxation,
or tyranny. Then when those limits are approached, fear should be the first of many guards to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness. Appropriate fear. Because of the consequences
Previous 28-Mar-05 Blog