You will not save every child on earth, but you will save every kid in your local community. This way you are perhaps still losing a lot of possessions. Your nice suit, the money you had in your wallet when jumping into the pond, maybe you invest in people to watch the shores and so on. But in return, you become a pillar of the community. Someone that people look up to because you embody a kind of intrinsic worth. Meanwhile, your community is enriched by the presence of young people which over time can make you more virtuous.
What master morality has a problem with (and thus the problem that slave morality has with it) is not doing good. It's not that the master never does anything good or nice, or that he doesn't do so on even just pragmatic grounds. Even a pagan aristocrat like Caesar saw reason to be seen as liberal and generous (generosity coming out of overflowing capacity is okay).
It's the leap to "okay, but you can help everyone in your community". It's the totalizing, the flattening. There's no community, this is an idea from slave societies. We're not equals. Some people are better than others and their capacities matter more. In fact, caring about everybody denies them the aristocratic surplus they need to achieve their potential.
To use an example: let's say a Frenchman could sell the Mona Lisa to a billionaire who really wants to burn it and, in exchange a million nondescript, randomly selected people across the globe (no Frenchmen) will be saved from death. The part of him that feels this is either obviously right or not easily argued against is slave morality. The part that recoils sheds light on the impulse behind master morality. There's just something here worth more than some people's lives. And that impulse would almost certainly be called cruel if articulated, if it came down to a choice.
Was quite an experience slowly cottoning on to the fact that Cameron literally just remade Avatar 1 & 2. I would understand if we were coming full circle and ending this but we have two more to go!
I don't know if he realized he didn't have enough material or he's trying to stuff theaters but the audacity is incredible.
I would be more angry if I paid IMAX prices but they only had 3d showings (eye issues make it pointless). TBF: I was also high and Spyder's triumphant welcome to the cookout sent me out on a happy note.
Another place where Cameron met my low expectations was not framing the hard-ass female general as a girlboss who can do no wrong. She makes several clearly correct decisions, and also demonstrates fallibility when Quaritch ungrounds himself and bails out her ass. Shame she dies in a magnetic fire tornado.
I mean, she was pretty wrong - and I don't remember her being that antagonistic or stupid in the first sequel. Quaritch didn't go native. He made an alliance with a local tribe ( and used them more effectively than she used RDA resources btw) leveraging a personal relationship with the local chieftain (usually you'd marry his daughter or something but w/e) . That meant absorbing a few of their visible traditions to keep them onside.
What did she think colonialism meant? Vibes? Papers? Essays?
Tanista
1d ago
and bad for me to restrict them so they can't keep jumping in the lake.
I don't think this holds for most of Christian history. Yes, you had to fish the babies out of Roman trash heaps. I don't think Christians, once they had the power, were against using it for their own good.
It becomes a lot less altruistic if you add in "...and I will be the one who did it", as the people who do that rather typically do. People with master morality will sometimes make everyone better off for their own glory. Elon Musk, yes, but also Andrew Carnegie and many others.
This fits Alfred Nobel, who gave his money to do something to glorify his name after the invention of dynamite. But...this is slave morality too no? He already achieved something great, yet he was so guilty he needed to do something to atone. All great men possess agency, but they're not really free of slave morality either.
Bill Gates already was a great man, giving away his money to strangers merely to improve their lives (some might cynically say as a way of washing off his more unsavory reputation as Microsoft's ruthless head), hell this entire notion of billionaires handing off their money is pretty Christian (it's of dubious acceptability in Islam iirc).
Tanista
3d ago
Trudeau wasn't kicked out for the same reason Trump wasn't for so many things: he was ultimately answerable to the public.
Most cancellations would probably be short circuited if there was a public vote on them.
Another sign is the apparent collapse in the popularity of Hip-Hop and the return of Country music with a vengeance.
Thing is that hip hop is an incredibly "unwoke" genre in content if not allegiance. If these battles are no longer being fought it's cause the wokes accepted only a partial victory: rampant misogyny, actual toxic masculinity in gangster rap and barely-even-coded homophobia but the top talent are expected to toe the line if they want to go really mainstream. But the low end, especially the regional drill scenes? Can be functionally amoral.
I would think it's female pop stars like Beyonce that would be benefitting from consumption as a sign of loyalty and who you'd expect to drop off if we're past peak woke.
There is no contradiction between being a slave moralist and trying to dominate, because slave morality is not the absence of the desire for power but the result of the inability to fulfill those desires and an attempt to achieve by undermining and inverting the values of the master.
The idea that desiring power for its own use makes one a "master" and categorically different from the victim/slave is actually a woke view. Nietzsche, well, he was less optimistic about their motivations.
More options
Context Copy link