Still On the Theme. And a Guest Commentary.

Well No not truly a guest commentary, but moreso a few wise quotes from a wise man, that bears on the theme of (as I will call it today)

America Unhinged! How Partisan Politics are Killing the Nation.


And I should say the wise man in consideration is that very model of masterful mental moderation, Bertrand Russell. The source essay touches on several themes, but it was titled:
"On the Value of Scepticism."

Here are the quotes:


The opinions for which people are willing to fight and persecute all belong to one of the three classes which this scepticism condemns. When there are rational grounds for an opinion, people are content to set them forth and wait for them to operate. In such cases, people do not hold their opinions with passion; they hold them calmly, and set forth their reasons quietly. The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder's lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately. Except in China, a man is thought a poor creature unless he has strong opinions on such matters; people hate sceptics far more than they hate the passionate advocates of opinions hostile to their own. It is thought that the claims of practical life demand opinions on such questions, and that, if we became more rational, social existence would be impossible.

* * * *

Politicians do not find any attractions in a view which does not lend itself to party declamation, and ordinary mortals prefer views which attribute misfortune to the machinations of their enemies. Consequently people fight for and against quite irrelevant measures, while the few who have a rational opinion are not listened to because they do not minister to any one's passions.

* * * *

What would be the effect of a spread of rational scepticism? Human events spring from passions, which generate systems of attendant myths. Psychoanalysts have studied the individual manifestations of this process in lunatics, certified and uncertified. A man who has suffered some humiliation invents a theory that he is King of England, and develops all kinds of ingenious explanations of the fact that he is not treated with that respect which his exalted position demands. In this case, his delusion is one with which his neighbours do not sympathize, so they lock him up. But if, instead of asserting only his own greatness, he asserts the greatness of his nation or his class or his creed, he wins hosts of adherents, and becomes a political or religious leader, even if, to the impartial outsider, his views seem just as absurd as those found in asylums. In this way a collective insanity grows up, which follows laws very similar to those of individual insanity.

* * * *

Our instinctive apparatus consists of two parts -- the one tending to further our own life and that of our descendants, the other tending to thwart the lives of supposed rivals. The first includes the joy of life, and love, and art, which is psychologically an offshoot of love. The second includes competition, patriotism, and war. Conventional morality does everything to suppress the first and encourage the second. True morality would do the exact opposite. Our dealings with those whom we love may be safely left to instinct; it is our dealings with those whom we hate that ought to be brought under the dominion of reason. In the modern world, those whom we effectively hate are distant groups, especially foreign nations. We conceive them abstractly, and deceive ourselves into the belief that acts which are really embodiments of hatred are done from love of justice or some such lofty motive. Only a large measure of scepticism can tear away the veils which hide this truth from us. Having achieved that, we could begin to build a new morality, not based on envy and restriction, but on the wish for a full life and the realization that other human beings are a help and not a hindrance when once the madness of envy has been cured.


http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/russell4.htm

Honestly, I can't say that the early 21st century's politics are all that different than early 20th. We seem to be dealing with the same core problems. Russell might be flabbergasted with our "news cycles," insta-punditry, and how the irrational passions, the (as he called it) "Collective Insanity," is being marshalled and channeled with such brutal efficiency and effect.

Not quite 100 years later, we (seemingly all of us) still need to learn the lesson of skepticism and rationality he wrote so elequently about.

I hope that someone, somebody or somebodies with greater clout or at least greater media presence can pick up the Russell's banner of rational skepticism and promote it. Seems to me that mostly what is being promoted today by those with such presence is nothing more that more hatred, more bile, more viciousness, and more of the irrational and destructive form of passion, that is only making things worse.

Call it "Collective Insanity," or call it "Irrational Passion." Either way it is something we clearly can do better without, after we drive a stake through its blackheart, burn the wicked corpse, and scatter the tainted ashes to the four winds.

I should probably stop there (as a compositional matter) but this thread of thought reminds me of a recurring question I have, and that is:

"When did people first begin to believe the bullshit that being passionate about their beliefs, makes those beliefs any more reasonable?"

But I admit, the answer to that, if any, is likely that such bullshit is as ancient as any other of the traditional human vices.