How to make peace with might makes right?
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
How to make peace with might makes right?
For all practical intents and purposes, might makes right. For all practical intents and purposes, the boss is always right, so is the police, doctors, anyone else who holds the position of more power in a power hierarchy. Such situations can upset one's sense of right and wrong, one's sense of life being meaningful.
How can one make peace with "might makes right"?
What arguments can one use to calm oneself in the face of wrongdoing, harm, and injustice against one's own person by those who hold more power than oneself?
Thanks.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
The arguments you can present yourself with to calm you in the face of perceived injustice are:
1. Bad deeds are like bad weather, you cannot change them unless they are your own bad deeds then you can change them.
2.Think about practical steps you might take to protect yourself against malpractice by authorities, first having made sure you are not paranoid.
- Marvin_Edwards
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: William James
- Contact:
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
In a democratic society, power (might) ultimately rests with the people. The people make the laws and the people pay the police and the courts to enforce them. There are many laws that were specifically created to control your boss. There are child labor laws, occupational safety laws, laws prohibiting racial and sexual discrimination in hiring and firing, workman's compensation laws, unemployment insurance laws, minimum wage laws, etc. For the police there are laws governing excessive use of force. For the doctor there are malpractice laws.baker wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 8:01 am Greetings.
For all practical intents and purposes, might makes right. For all practical intents and purposes, the boss is always right, so is the police, doctors, anyone else who holds the position of more power in a power hierarchy. Such situations can upset one's sense of right and wrong, one's sense of life being meaningful.
How can one make peace with "might makes right"?
What arguments can one use to calm oneself in the face of wrongdoing, harm, and injustice against one's own person by those who hold more power than oneself?
Thanks.
So, if you can make a case that you are indeed right, and not merely imagining you are right while being wrong, then you should be able to convince enough people to elect a representative who will guarantee your right by law. And, if you cannot convince enough people that you're right, then perhaps you're wrong, and you'll learn that by stating your case and hearing theirs.
As the old Pogo cartoon wisely pointed out, "We have met the enemy, and he is us".
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
You do realize that lawsuits are, for most people, prohibitively expensive to begin with? And that even if one wins a lawsuit, there are repercussions?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 10:39 amIn a democratic society, power (might) ultimately rests with the people. The people make the laws and the people pay the police and the courts to enforce them. There are many laws that were specifically created to control your boss. There are child labor laws, occupational safety laws, laws prohibiting racial and sexual discrimination in hiring and firing, workman's compensation laws, unemployment insurance laws, minimum wage laws, etc. For the police there are laws governing excessive use of force. For the doctor there are malpractice laws.
For example, if you sue your boss, even if you win, chances are you will never find another job, because you will go on record as someone who sued their boss.
Example: You're neighbors with a police officer in a suburb. The police officer lets their sewage to run onto your property. Yes, there are laws being broken here. You file all the proper complaints to the proper institutions, nothing happens. The authorities agree that laws are being broken there, but nobody does anything.So, if you can make a case that you are indeed right, and not merely imagining you are right while being wrong, then you should be able to convince enough people to elect a representative who will guarantee your right by law. And, if you cannot convince enough people that you're right, then perhaps you're wrong, and you'll learn that by stating your case and hearing theirs.
Blame the victim?As the old Pogo cartoon wisely pointed out, "We have met the enemy, and he is us".
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
Greetings to you too, baker, and welcome to our dance!
I don't think might makes right; I think this is a mis-statement. If one has might (strength), one can act as one wishes, without regard for those less mighty, because they can't prevent it. If someone mightier comes along, they can rule, if they wish to.baker wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 8:01 am For all practical intents and purposes, might makes right. For all practical intents and purposes, the boss is always right, so is the police, doctors, anyone else who holds the position of more power in a power hierarchy. Such situations can upset one's sense of right and wrong, one's sense of life being meaningful.
How can one make peace with "might makes right"?
What arguments can one use to calm oneself in the face of wrongdoing, harm, and injustice against one's own person by those who hold more power than oneself?
Might makes right implies that strength leads to some form of moral correctness or alright-ness. It can't and it doesn't. But strength can do what it wishes if all others present are weaker than it is. It's more about coercion than rightness.
How to make peace with this? The same way we make peace with the COVID19 virus, or an earthquake, or the movement of tectonic plates. We accept it. We can oppose 'might makes right', if we choose, although we can only enforce our wishes if we are the mightier. Many humans like to think we have grown beyond 'might makes right', but I feel that just a little empirical observation refutes this. Our world is dominated by those whose might is measured in dollars, billions and billions of dollars.
Make peace with it by distinguishing "is" from "ought". First, accept what is - 'might makes right', in this case - and then (if you wish to) strive to attain what you think ought to be. Start with acceptance, and move on from there. Good luck on your philosophical journey!
"Who cares, wins"
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
baker wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 8:01 am Greetings.
For all practical intents and purposes, might makes right. For all practical intents and purposes, the boss is always right, so is the police, doctors, anyone else who holds the position of more power in a power hierarchy. Such situations can upset one's sense of right and wrong, one's sense of life being meaningful.
How can one make peace with "might makes right"?
What arguments can one use to calm oneself in the face of wrongdoing, harm, and injustice against one's own person by those who hold more power than oneself?
Thanks.
Regarding the doctor, if you are an adult and if you are not dealing with psychiatrists forcibly committing you to a mental institution, you can refuse to go along with what a doctor says, and you can simply never see that doctor again. I have done that with more than one doctor, deciding to never see that doctor again. If, however, you are a child, then your parents get to decide such things, and if you are forcibly committed to a mental institution, then your doctors decide things for you. In those cases, you can request a different doctor, but your request might be ignored.
With your boss, you can consider finding another job. That may not be practically possible, depending on your particular circumstances, but it is something to think about if it is a possibility.
With police, there are some checks on what they do, though that is often expensive and after the fact (via lawyers); typically, the best approach is to avoid situations in which one is likely to encounter the police. How possible that is for you depends on a great many things, though, again, it is worth thinking about.
I myself have rarely had to deal with police, and part of that is from avoiding situations and activities that would make encountering police very likely. If you do have to deal with them, I recommend being polite but not servile.
To calm yourself, you might find Epictetus useful. Here is a sample; you can read more at the link:
http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.htmlEpictetus wrote:1. Some things are in our control and others not. Things in our control are opinion, pursuit, desire, aversion, and, in a word, whatever are our own actions. Things not in our control are body, property, reputation, command, and, in one word, whatever are not our own actions.
The things in our control are by nature free, unrestrained, unhindered; but those not in our control are weak, slavish, restrained, belonging to others. Remember, then, that if you suppose that things which are slavish by nature are also free, and that what belongs to others is your own, then you will be hindered. You will lament, you will be disturbed, and you will find fault both with gods and men. But if you suppose that only to be your own which is your own, and what belongs to others such as it really is, then no one will ever compel you or restrain you. Further, you will find fault with no one or accuse no one. You will do nothing against your will. No one will hurt you, you will have no enemies, and you not be harmed.
Aiming therefore at such great things, remember that you must not allow yourself to be carried, even with a slight tendency, towards the attainment of lesser things. Instead, you must entirely quit some things and for the present postpone the rest. But if you would both have these great things, along with power and riches, then you will not gain even the latter, because you aim at the former too: but you will absolutely fail of the former, by which alone happiness and freedom are achieved.
Work, therefore to be able to say to every harsh appearance, "You are but an appearance, and not absolutely the thing you appear to be." And then examine it by those rules which you have, and first, and chiefly, by this: whether it concerns the things which are in our own control, or those which are not; and, if it concerns anything not in our control, be prepared to say that it is nothing to you.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
Hi, thanks!Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 12:52 pmGreetings to you too, baker, and welcome to our dance!
But why not? Could you elaborate?Might makes right implies that strength leads to some form of moral correctness or alright-ness. It can't and it doesn't.
I don't understand what you mean here by "acceptance". Do you mean a kind of resignation, quietism? As in, "That's just how it is, I'm doomed that people more powerful than myself will always trample on me, and this is simply as good as it gets" ?How to make peace with this? The same way we make peace with the COVID19 virus, or an earthquake, or the movement of tectonic plates. We accept it.
I also don't see how the analogy you make is valid. I don't see any moral implication in natural disasters, diseases, and such. Those are subject to the laws of physics which have no moral dimension. But human actions are not like that, because human actions do have a moral dimension -- in the way they are intended and in the way they are perceived.
Exactly. And I think this says something about the moral nature of human life.Many humans like to think we have grown beyond 'might makes right', but I feel that just a little empirical observation refutes this. Our world is dominated by those whose might is measured in dollars, billions and billions of dollars.
If the mighty continually get their way, continually prevail (and they do), then on the grounds of what can one think that this is somehow morally questionable? Why shouldn't the fact that they prevail be an indication of their moral rightness?
It's not clear what the "ought" is.Make peace with it by distinguishing "is" from "ought". First, accept what is - 'might makes right', in this case - and then (if you wish to) strive to attain what you think ought to be. Start with acceptance, and move on from there.
If something is, then why wouldn't it be precisely because it ought to be?
- Marvin_Edwards
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: William James
- Contact:
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
And there are even laws that protect whistleblowers.baker wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 12:02 pmYou do realize that lawsuits are, for most people, prohibitively expensive to begin with? And that even if one wins a lawsuit, there are repercussions?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 10:39 amIn a democratic society, power (might) ultimately rests with the people. The people make the laws and the people pay the police and the courts to enforce them. There are many laws that were specifically created to control your boss. There are child labor laws, occupational safety laws, laws prohibiting racial and sexual discrimination in hiring and firing, workman's compensation laws, unemployment insurance laws, minimum wage laws, etc. For the police there are laws governing excessive use of force. For the doctor there are malpractice laws.
For example, if you sue your boss, even if you win, chances are you will never find another job, because you will go on record as someone who sued their boss.
So, if you can make a case that you are indeed right, and not merely imagining you are right while being wrong, then you should be able to convince enough people to elect a representative who will guarantee your right by law. And, if you cannot convince enough people that you're right, then perhaps you're wrong, and you'll learn that by stating your case and hearing theirs.
Then I suppose you are shirt out of luck. What the fork do you expect me to do about it?baker wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 12:02 pm Example: You're neighbors with a police officer in a suburb. The police officer lets their sewage to run onto your property. Yes, there are laws being broken here. You file all the proper complaints to the proper institutions, nothing happens. The authorities agree that laws are being broken there, but nobody does anything.
As the old Pogo cartoon wisely pointed out, "We have met the enemy, and he is us".
Seems appropriate at this point.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
There is no such thing as Free Will. Every behaviour of every person is caused.I don't understand what you mean here by "acceptance". Do you mean a kind of resignation, quietism? As in, "That's just how it is, I'm doomed that people more powerful than myself will always trample on me, and this is simply as good as it gets" ?
I also don't see how the analogy you make is valid. I don't see any moral implication in natural disasters, diseases, and such. Those are subject to the laws of physics which have no moral dimension. But human actions are not like that, because human actions do have a moral dimension -- in the way they are intended and in the way they are perceived.
Causes fall into the following three categories:
1. Causal chains which happen over time.
2. Causal circumstances which are concurrent with the event.
3. Law-like connections which so that event e) is part of the definition of event e2)
Determinism is useful for getting rid of the hassle of blaming annoying people.
you don't have to be quiescent, as determinism does not imply fatalism.You can be as free as reason permits. The more reason you can bring to bear on other people's annoying or hurtful behaviour the more you are free from the hassle of it.
- Marvin_Edwards
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: William James
- Contact:
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
There is no such thing as freedom from causation, freedom from oneself, or freedom from reality.Belindi wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 7:21 pm baker wrote:
There is no such thing as Free Will.I don't understand what you mean here by "acceptance". Do you mean a kind of resignation, quietism? As in, "That's just how it is, I'm doomed that people more powerful than myself will always trample on me, and this is simply as good as it gets" ?
I also don't see how the analogy you make is valid. I don't see any moral implication in natural disasters, diseases, and such. Those are subject to the laws of physics which have no moral dimension. But human actions are not like that, because human actions do have a moral dimension -- in the way they are intended and in the way they are perceived.
But there is such a thing as Free Will. Free will is when someone decides for themselves what they WILL do, while FREE of coercion and other forms of undue influence. It happens all the time. And this is the definition that is used when assessing a person's moral or legal responsibility for their actions.
Of course. But the most meaningful and relevant cause of a deliberate act is the act of deliberation that precedes it, that is, the thoughts and the feelings that occurred in the head of the individual.
Here are the three categories of causal mechanisms:
1. Physical: inanimate matter behaves passively in response to physical forces. Example, a bowling ball placed on a slope will always roll downhill.
2. Biological: living organisms behave purposefully to survive, thrive, and reproduce. Example, a squirrel on that same slope will go up, down, or in any other direction where he expects to find his next acorn, or a mate. He is not governed by gravity, but by his biological drives.
3. Rational: intelligent species behave deliberately by imagining alternate ways of satisfying their needs, estimating how different options are likely to play out, and choosing the option that seems best. Example, you and I are choosing our words in order to communicate on the topic of free will.
Determinism, if it is to survive, must include all three causal mechanisms to explain the causes of all events.
Ironically, praise and blame, reward and punishment, are all deterministic mechanism of behavior modification. The only reason we bother to blame someone is to get them to stop their annoying behavior.
Reasoning is deterministic, of course. And deterministic reasoning leads us to address hurtful behavior, by taking steps to change that behavior. If the behavior is illegal, then correcting the behavior will likely involve a penalty.
A just penalty would seek to protect the rights of all the relevant parties. A just penalty would (a) repair the harm to the victim if possible, (b) correct the offender's future behavior is corrigible, (c) secure the offender to protect the public until his behavior is corrected, and (d) do no more harm to the offender or his rights than is reasonably required to accomplish (a), (b), and (c).
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
I started this thread in the hopes that someone might present some idea of a worldview, some kind of "metaphysical underpinning" for how to be at peace with blatant yet ordinary injustice.Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 5:42 pmThen I suppose you are shirt out of luck. What the fork do you expect me to do about it?
For the majority of human history, the majority of the human population were slaves, or otherwise disenfranchized and not considered fully human. And yet those people lived on, they kept striving, they continued to believe that life was worth living. I'm curious what it was that those people believed about the nature of the world, humanity, and themselves that gave them a measure of positivity and energy to keep going.
Clearly, for many people, monotheistic religions and karmic religions offered such hopeful narratives, promising that the "score will be settled" some time in the future.
But in the absence of such religious narratives, what options are there?
How?
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
I don't find this calming at all. It seems like a tacit approval of "might makes right".Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 2:03 pmTo calm yourself, you might find Epictetus useful. Here is a sample; you can read more at the link:
---
I don't understand what you mean by this. Do you mean coming up with rational explanations of their behavior, such as "he is the way he is because he's an alcoholic / his parents beat him / she has a personality disorder ..."?Belindi wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 7:21 pmDeterminism is useful for getting rid of the hassle of blaming annoying people.
you don't have to be quiescent, as determinism does not imply fatalism.You can be as free as reason permits. The more reason you can bring to bear on other people's annoying or hurtful behaviour the more you are free from the hassle of it.
How does this differ from excusing or even condoning their behavior?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
It differs from excusing or condoning like you don't take the trouble to excuse or condone a landslip. or feet, or the existence of stinging insects. Bad behaviour is , so deal with it. I agree with Jack D Ripper about the value of Epictetus who would be my choice among the Stoics, although there are other Stoics worth exploring.baker wrote: ↑November 29th, 2020, 6:52 amI don't find this calming at all. It seems like a tacit approval of "might makes right".Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 2:03 pmTo calm yourself, you might find Epictetus useful. Here is a sample; you can read more at the link:
---
I don't understand what you mean by this. Do you mean coming up with rational explanations of their behavior, such as "he is the way he is because he's an alcoholic / his parents beat him / she has a personality disorder ..."?Belindi wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 7:21 pmDeterminism is useful for getting rid of the hassle of blaming annoying people.
you don't have to be quiescent, as determinism does not imply fatalism.You can be as free as reason permits. The more reason you can bring to bear on other people's annoying or hurtful behaviour the more you are free from the hassle of it.
How does this differ from excusing or even condoning their behavior?
If you are a determinist you believe people are not entirely free from causes of their behaviours. The only way men can be more free is via knowledge and developed critical ability. These are the ideal ends of education as it should be.
baker wrote:
Yes. And this sort of rational explanation also includes self knowledge. Psychoanalysis aims at development of self knowledge.Do you mean coming up with rational explanations of their behavior, such as "he is the way he is because he's an alcoholic / his parents beat him / she has a personality disorder ..."?
Brains are plastic, even the nervous system is plastic. Determinism does not imply prediction and you can create much of your future by reasoning.
If you know you are 'an alcoholic' for instance you at least have a medical name for what is making you less creative than you otherwise might be.
If you know your parents beating you has made you timid you know a cause of your lack of creativity and you can imagine what your life would be if you learned to be more bold.
Reason implies imagination, which reason differentiates from fantasy.
I cannot comment on personality disorder as I don't know what it is.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
I'm having a really hard time with this.
The stoic outlook on life has always seemed to come naturally to me -- that kind of defensive individualism focused on virtuous action. But it also always made me feel like a loser.
It has been my experience that the line between what one can control and what one cannot control is quite blurry and flexible. If one invests enough of the right kind of strategic effort, one can have power over a great number of things that ordinarily seem outside of one's control. For example, I once convinced my parents to adopt a diametrically opposed position to the one they used to hold firmly. It took me about 4 months of consistent diplomatic effort, but it worked. And once one has success with such chagnes, it's hard to go back to some easy "I'm powerless over this".
Sure. And this involves potentially revising one's ideas of right and wrong, good and bad.Brains are plastic, even the nervous system is plastic. Determinism does not imply prediction and you can create much of your future by reasoning.
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: How to make peace with might makes right?
baker wrote: ↑November 29th, 2020, 6:52 amI don't find this calming at all. It seems like a tacit approval of "might makes right".Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑November 28th, 2020, 2:03 pmTo calm yourself, you might find Epictetus useful. Here is a sample; you can read more at the link:
---
It is not an approval of that idea.
Here are your choices in life. You can be upset about things you cannot change, or you can be not upset about things you cannot change. Regardless of which of those you choose, you cannot change what you cannot change. So, which is better for you, to be upset about things you cannot change, or not be upset about things you cannot change?
In life, you can only pick among real possibilities, you cannot have what is not possible. If you insist on having what is not possible to have, you will be unhappy.
To give a specific example, you are going to eventually die. You cannot choose to never die; you will die no matter what. Your options are to be upset about the fact that you will die and then die, or not be upset about the fact that you will die and then die. Not dying is not an option. So, which is better for you? To be upset about death and then die, or to not be upset about death and then die?
You gain nothing by being upset about things you cannot change.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023