:smack: Obviously, I don’t speak English well enough to communicate my point, which is embarrassing, given that I’m a native and all.
lissener’s claim is that as far he can tell, for someone to be a conservative, they must be motivated by either selfishness or stupidity. It is this claim which I wish to deny; hence its inclusion in my last post. I am not presenting the world as divided into “people who see clearly” and “stupid selfish jackasses.” I am presenting myself as “conservative, yet not stupid selfish jackass.” Are you following me so far? Let’s stop here if you’re not, because if you’re not, I’m wasting my time.
Now then, I wish to present myself as a conservative. No one has denied that I fall under this category, so I’ll take it as read that this particular claim is accepted. Let’s stop here if it’s not, because if it isn’t, I’m wasting my time.
I further wish to present myself as not stupid. Once again, this has not, so far, been disputed. Isn’t this finding common ground thing marvelous? But if this is not common ground, we’ll again stop, because if I’m an idiot there’s no point in debating me, and if you think I’m an idiot there’s no point in debating with you.
I wish further still to present myself as not motivated by self-interest. This appears to be the point under discussion at present.
Now, I will admit the following: somewhere in the bowels of my thought processes, my morality has some element of self-interest. That is, I accept that one should do unto others as you would have them do unto you. This is because were everyone to feel the same way, we’d all be happy people and life would be glorious. But in order for it to work, we all have to want to be treated with kindness and consideration, with fairness, justice, and so far. Like any rational person, I would like to be so treated.
Have I lost anyone yet?
So if “motivated by self-interest” is to be understood as motivated by moral considerations, since moral considerations (at least under the golden rule) demand some level of self-interest, then lissener’s critique is utterly useless and not a critique at all. I’m motivated by moral considerations… Oh, the horror! :eek:
His critique is further useless because the same is true of many liberals, many anarchists, many sheep-buggerers, the Dalai Lama, etc. For his claim to have any real meaning, it must be a more direct form of self-interest, i.e. “I support this because I would derive some tangible benefits from it,” as opposed to “I support this because I feel it is the moral thing to do.”
So when I say I don’t adopt the positions I do because I’m a stupid selfish jackass, I am saying that the positions I adopt are not adopted because I will derive some tangible benefit from doing so, nor are they adopted because I have the reasoning skills of a lungfish. The positions I adopt are adopted because I believe them to be morally correct. Is that really so bloody difficult to understand?
Obviously, I confused the issue to a certain extent by pointing out that morality is typically based on self-interest, but I took it for granted that people understand that and that lissener’s claim is not to be understood as “conservatives are moral people.”
