The Man in the High Castle and Philosophy by Bruce Krajewski

Author:Bruce Krajewski
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780812699685
Publisher: Open Court
Published: 2017-06-13T00:00:00+00:00

12

Are We Really Sure They’re Wrong?

TIMOTHY HSIAO

If you’re reading this, then you probably think that there’s something deeply wrong and unjust about the way the Japanese and German governments are operating within the universe of The Man in the High Castle. But why? What do we mean when we say that something is “wrong” or “unjust”?

There are two basic ways of approaching this question. According to what we may call moral relativism, the truth of moral statements is dependent on either the individual or the individual’s culture. So if something is right or wrong, then it is right or wrong for me or my culture, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s the same for you or your culture. There is no “higher” morality to which everyone is subject. Morally speaking, one view is as good as another.

On the other hand, moral objectivism asserts that the truth of moral statements are independent of what individuals or cultures believe. If something is objectively wrong, then it is wrong because it violates some higher moral law, and not because it is something on which an individual or culture has a negative opinion. Where does this moral law come from, you might ask? Answers vary, but popular ones include God, reason, and human nature. The one feature that all of these answers have in common is that morality is not something that we get to decide or make up.

Which view is more plausible? I submit that upon reflection, nearly everyone is in some way implicitly committed to the truth of moral objectivism. Although many people like to pay lip service to moral relativism, it is deeply inadequate in explaining what we know to be true about morality. Consider just one example: When Joe Blake is travelling from New York City to make initial contact with the Resistance, he interacts with a highway patrolman in the Midwest who assists him in changing a flat tire. During the course of his conversation, he asks the patrolman about ash that he notices is falling from the sky. The patrolman casually responds, “Oh, it’s the hospital. On Tuesdays they burn cripples . . . the terminally ill. Drag on the state.”

We’re rightly horrified at this revelation. There’s no doubt that such a practice should be condemned and resisted. But why? It can’t be that it violates a societal or cultural norm, for the very values of a Nazi society are such that those with disabilities should be put to death because they are “life unworthy of life.” Accordingly, if cultural relativism is true, then it’s morally permissible—and perhaps even obligatory—for those in a Nazi society to put the disabled to death because they are disabled. The real bad guys turn out to be the Resistance fighters, because they’re the ones working actively to undermine Nazi values!

But we rightly dismiss this as absurd. Nazi values are objectively corrupt, even to those who accept them. If it is ever possible for a society to make moral mistakes, then society cannot be the barometer of moral truth.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.