>On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 04:41:12 -0400 Yoshie Furuhashi
><furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> wrote:
>
> >>> The moral has to be performed, not declaimed.
> > I agree that taken as an ethical maxim, there's a problem of
>self-referentiality in my statement. :) Perhaps on this subject, the less
>said, the better. But I meant it as a suggestion for an instrumentalist
>approach (= shaping means to an end). Suppose your intention is to encourage
>ethical conduct. Which do you think is better -- discuss what is or isn't
>moral or hope to lead by examples, so to speak?
>
>At first glance it might appear to be Machiavellian... but it isn't. It's
>Hobbesian: you, who are incompetent, should trust in me to secure what is best
>for yourself. We need a leader who will be brave enough to do the right thing,
>and we need others to take the fall when things run awry. And you
>have no right
>to question my actions, because I am a moral leader, through my
>actions I shall
>be known, and you ought follow me or else face instrumental
>actions... (at least
>Machiavelli knew, implicitly, that the actions of the prince were evil).
No, _hope_ to lead by examples, while maintaining _silence_ over morality. Not by power, certainly not by threats of punishments ("follow me or else face instrumental actions"). Do what you think is your duty without advertising it as such, _if_ your hope is to encourage ethical conduct. Your hope may be dashed, of course. Then, "try again, fail again, fail better."
Think of cyber-conversations here, for instance. You model your behavior, say, according to Lacanian-Zizekian maxims (or whatever maxims you think are ethical) without advertising them. The rest of us may find your conduct admirable. Then we'll probably try to emulate your example. On the other hand, we may be indifferent to your example, and we may not even think that your conduct is moral. That's the risk you take.
>but your point is that moral actions constitute substance
>- which compromises the form of moral performance.
Moral advertising (because it can be tiresome) takes away from moral performance is my point. Threats issued from positions of power totally destroy it, it goes without saying.
Such is my suggestion for an instrumentalist approach. Your good deeds, not words, are to be an instrument to an end (spread of ethical conduct). We may additionally call it a Beckettian approach (= with regard to the whole business of morality, Beckett's works encourage us to see our hope for and inept attempts at actions, especially moral actions, as comic but still to keep up our spirits regardless. Don't give up. Keep going!)
Yoshie