1. Non-humanism.
What comes to mind first, is that my ethics are not rooted in either theistic or non-theistic humanism. I simply don't find the human project to be necessary - it is merely present, not something I like to conjecture about, in terms of goal-setting.
1.1. Perhaps I would be more imaginative in conjecture if I was richer, however. It would make sense to attempt to operationalise highly-capitalised gambits, if the capital was available.
2. Public Access
I'm a huge fan of public architecture and infrastructure. I think less highly of private developments. So the entire tradition of gatekeeping access to wealth based on family and friendship networks is quite boring to me. Maybe that puts me on the left as a socialist, but since I am of orientation (1) above, perhaps it is a sort of technocratic socialism, without emphasis on any underlying value of individual human lives.
2.1. And again, this probably reflects my intrinsic biases. I can understand that the rich are skeptical of the poor as freeloaders. As a relatively poor person, I am mainly a freeloader myself, costing the state more than the taxes I pay.
3. Summary
Maybe it remains useful to think of myself as preferring some sort of Borg-like society, where all individuals participate in collective omniscience of the present.
3.1. In practice, all of this gives me little reason to jump into active politics, given my state of relative poverty. So, perhaps, I remain exactly where the politicians want me.
No comments :
Post a Comment