3 ms·
By the time Machiavelli wrote The Prince, the very act of writing the book was a tracer round to rampant political cynicism. Once an attitude or ideology is the
by nefitty 5y ago
By the time Machiavelli wrote The Prince, the very act of writing the book was a tracer round to rampant political cynicism. Once an attitude or ideology is the target of satire, it has already bcome interwoven into a society. I presume that to be even moreso in eras where publishing had high cost.
There's also this naive commitment to truth. Yes, we want our mental models to be more accurate and predictive. What if a model results in an increase of net suffering? What is the role of a democratic government, to provide services to a society to lessen individual offering, or to pursue truth and align legislation at all costs?
- LudwigNagasena 5y agoThe point of a democratic government is being ruled by demos, the people. You are describing a government run by benevolent elites. In such case of course the government may lie and deceive people, and even pretend that it is democratic, but it won’t be a democratic government. The naive commitment to truth is the most fundamental requirement for the most basic freedom, the freedom to reason. To lie, to deceive someone means to take away that freedom.
- nefitty 5y agoThat makes sense. I'm not sure why the right to reason didn't cross my mind. Maybe I presumed it in the scenario I pictured. I'm not convinced that governments should have mandates to pursue truth at all costs. I think the true danger is when there is little tension between government and the fourth estate. Government actions need interpretation and presentation, and when those functions lapse or are neglected, is when individuals begin losing the right to reason. To be able to make decisions presupposes that non-elites are presented with the decision in the first place. This is the context within which the naive commitment for truth is a virtue.