fatti non foste a viver come bruti,
ma per seguir virtude…
you were not made
to live like brutes,
but
to follow virtue…
Dante Alighieri, circa 1300 AD
Perhaps Plato was right. Poets ought to be banned from the
realm. Only this morning have I realized how much damage did Dante do. The
initial error was admittedly tiny; but outsized consequences ensued from that.
He got carried away. Instead of accepting faithfully the magnificent synthesis
operated by St Thomas Aquinas between Aristotle and the Jewish-Christian
tradition, instead of remaining satisfied with his magisterial intuition as
truncated above, namely, we “were not made to live like brutes, but to follow
virtue”, he added: “(e conoscenza) and knowledge”.
Humanity has been on a slippery slope from that instant on.
To see the middle of the story, you have to run all the way
to the end of the 16th century and repeat with Francis
Bacon: “Knowledge is power”.
From there to the nihilistic Nietzschean
delusion of self-power through “will to power”, there is only a swell of the
chest.
Let the hot air get out and calmly return to St
Thomas . He said, “Virtue is the peak of power”. Do
you see the source of the modern confusion? We have objectified (remember the
objectivism of Ayn Rand, among others) power. What does it mean? We have
separated men and women from power. And we have made power our golden calf, our idol.
And we do indeed get a mountain of gold out of personal
power—only to forget the Midas curse. All we touch
becomes objectified metal, including our inner self.
If still in doubt, you have to read the work of Philip
Mirowski to see that even the power of science can be so corrupted as to be practiced
“just trying to make some money”.
Yes, let us return to the safety of St
Thomas . He did say virtue is the peak of power
(over the perfectibility of the self). He was right.
Love is a virtue.
I am surprising myself these days; I am speaking way too
much about love. Before I go one inch farther, allow me to tell you quite
frankly, good reader, that I know very little about love.
All I know about love comes from my understanding of
justice.
There too I was surprised. It was only after many years of
study of political and economic justice that I discovered the essential
characteristic of justice. No matter what jurists and philosophers tell you
about it, justice is a virtue.
And no matter what theologians, philosophers, and
sociologists tell you about it, if they do not tell you that love is a virtue
they deceive themselves and deceive you.
Love is a virtue.
That is all I know about love. And since I know that love is
a virtue, I also know that justice cannot be practiced without love: love for yourself,
and love for your neighbor.
That is what I discovered years ago. Now allow me to expand
a little bit on this strange relationship: No love, no justice.
And from there, the issue becomes entirely clear. You cannot
practice justice, if you do not have courage. Nor can you optimally practice
justice, if you do not know what justice is. Hence, you need to be aided by the
three intellectual virtues. If you want to practice justice, you also need to
all four cardinal virtues.
And the linkages do not stop there. You cannot practice
justice, if you do not have hope and faith. Hope that you and your community
have the strength to carry on the works of justice; and faith that you will
ultimately succeed.
And there you have it. The four cardinal virtues are prudence,
justice, courage, and temperance. The three intellectual virtues are wisdom,
science, and understanding. And the three theological virtues are hope,
faith, and love.
You cannot properly practice one virtue without properly practicing
them all. (Dante was either redundant or incomplete.)
I always said that love is not made on the hearth but in
heaven. Now I know it for sure. Love is the ultimate theological virtue; love
is a gift from God. (You can make this explanation light and secular, but
atomistic and mysterious, by believing in the power of love without believing
in God.)
All this is to see the virtues aligned longitudinally,
north-south. To have a more complete understanding of the virtues we have also
to see each one of them aligned latitudinally, east-west. Here is what happens
then.
Love, especially love unrelated to men and women, becomes an
ungodly mess, fit only to be revealed by poets and sears. And then see where they
get you.
Love in the concrete can be truly understood when it is related
to our weaknesses and our vices. Hence love stands “in the golden mean”, as Aristotle—and
Confucius—would say, or “at the peak”, as St Thomas
would say, of this arc that goes from indifference to hate. (Find for yourself
the two extremes within which all other virtues lie.)
John Stuart Mill veered a step away from indifference and
put tolerance at the East Side of the chain.
Oh, did I forget Freud? We mustn’t forget Freud. Freud got
exasperated with all these nuances: he obliterated them all, and recognized
only the Ego at the center of the universe. Thus he reduced love to sex.
Do you see it now? Once you put it at the center of two
perpendicular lines, you see how complex love is. Then you see why ultimately
love comes from God and wants to return to God.
Thus even love turns out to be one of the things borrowed—just
like the earth. Now you can accuse me of having this “feeling”—or worse,
perhaps, this opinion—about love. And I cannot empirically, factually,
scientifically “prove” (what? the existence of, the validity of) my opinion.
But in this Age of Rights, I have the right to my opinion—and I am certainly going
to exercise this hard fought right.
And so I repeat. Love is one of those borrowed things—just
like the earth. Now there is
something I can prove: I did not create the earth; and none of my ancestors
did. I do not know about you. But neither I nor my family is that bright. (To
borrow from Garrison Keillor, we are just a little bit “above average”.) And I
can prove this statement. I have neither fashioned nor inherited any legal document
that gives me “proof” that I have created the earth. And neither I nor any one
of my ancestors has ever had all that it takes to create a speck of dirt: no
genes, no chemicals to create such a “soup”.
I and (I hope) all the members of my family consider
ourselves simply guests on spaceship earth.
And there you have in a nutshell the struggle of the last
800 years. When you put Love, God, and the love of God at the center of the
discussion you automatically put man in proper perspective.
The best you can do is to consider the gift of being made a
co-creator with God. That’s a full load of responsibility for me, but it is not
nearly good enough for those who exalt individualism.
Individualism, by denying the reality of Society and the
reality of The Other, had necessarily to hide away the complexity of the virtues.
To love means, not only to love yourself and your god, it especially means to
love The Other—no matter how despicable s/he might appear to you.
Deep thanks to David S. Wise and Peter J.
Bearse for invaluable editorial assistance.
Carmine Gorga, PhD, is president of
The Somist Institute and author of numerous publications in economic
theory and policy. Mr. Gorga can be reached at cgorga@jhu.edu. He
blogs at a-new-economic-atlas/.
Originally
published at http://www.spectacle.org/1011/gorga.html
No comments:
Post a Comment