(urth) What's So Great About Ushas?

Thu Jul 10 20:36:26 PDT 2008

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Lane Haygood <lhaygood at gmail.com> wrote:

> I suppose I could make myself clearer. Ever a problem.
>
> The reason why human concepts of morality might not apply to the Hieros
> goes back to my residual Kantianism.  For humans, our experience of the
> world is always subject the conditions for sensibility, space and time.
> That is, we _need_ time to be linear and run one way, or else our way of
> representing the world goes to bunk.  But how does that apply to
> Hierodules/-grammates? We know that they are not similarly bound by the
> linear flow of time as humans are. Thus, the human moral fear of death, and
> our value judgment of death as bad are because death represents the end, or
> cessation of life.  But for beings moving the opposite direction (Barbatus,
> etc.) or those capable of moving in any direction through the Atrium or
> Madregot might have a different feeling about death.  So while we regard the
> putative murder of the Urthlings as an immoral act, to them it might be the
> height of morality because it paves the way for rebirth, or that worldly
> death is not something they need fear.
>
> I forget who has it, but there is a contemporary writer who has a similar
> response to the problem of evil.  He takes up the recent tsunami as evidence
> that perhaps, in God's view, the death of people is not something to be
> lamented, if we assume a beneficial afterlife for good people. I'm not
> saying I buy it, mind you (in fact, I don't believe in gods of any sort) but
> the argument is, I think, defensible.
>
>

I mentioned in my response to Jeff why I don't think it's proper, or at
least fun, to consider moral relativism.  If nothing else, it's more fun to
consider a problem than to dismiss it.  The destruction of Urth is a
momentous occasion and the climax of chiliads of extensive planning, and I
think that dismissing it as just something to get done gives it too short
shrift.

And as for Sev being a moral agent, well, we _all_ are moral agents, whether
> we're conscious of our status as such. And I don't necessarily read
> Severian's lack of introspection or analysis of his own actions as being an
> inherent blindness in his person, but from the tone he takes he seems to be
> attempting to give as objective a history as he can, not a memoir-ish
> analysis of his own life.
>
>

It's I suppose a consistent viewpoint that the Hierogrammates are good guys
and Severian's following them unquestioningly is harmless.  Thus, for
example , when instead of taking the opportunity to question Apheta about
what's actually going on he just does what he always does to all women he
ever meets, it can be seen as a mostly harmless vice (though perhaps not
quite worthy of the EPITOME OF HUMANITY).  "Consistent" is about the highest
praise I can give to this sort of interpretation though.  However while
Severian's character flaws might be surprising in his position as ambassador
of a supposedly reformed humanity, they are certainly very fitting in an
alternative position of puppet.  It's just a matter of which perspective one
finds more compelling.

Lane
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Paul B <pb.stuff at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think we're straying too far afield here.
>>
>>  On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Lane Haygood <lhaygood at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Now we've strayed into my territory (philosophy!).
>>>
>>> I think that the analysis given of the Hierogrammates is too one-sided,
>>> ethically.  We're assuming that morality works on a broadly utilitarian
>>> basis:  e.g., it is somehow better to save the population of Urth than let
>>> it pass away.
>>
>>
>> Wha?!  Saying that murder on a planetwide scale is wrong is not an
>> inherently utilitarian statement but a very general one.  It doesn't assume
>> much about a moral framework, save one that places inherent value on life.
>>
>>
>>> Rather, if we look at the moral actions internally, we ask whether it is
>>> morally right for Severian to bring the New Sun, not on the basis of what
>>> effects it might have, but whether that act was right in and of itself.
>>>  Analogizing to Biblical morality, look at the use of Noah's Flood to wash
>>> away what passed for a degenerate Earth/Urth.  I'm no Catholic, so I don't
>>> know if there is a standard dogmatic theodicy that is accepted in response
>>> to the problem of evil, but I think that the majority-Christian view on that
>>> argument is the "God has his reasons" theodicy.  In other words, it is
>>> unquestionable and axiomatic that God does only good things.  So sending the
>>> Flood (make of that what you will) is a good act.  Even if we cannot
>>> understand how it is good, if God has his reasons for it, they may be beyond
>>> what we can understand, being finite mortals and all
>>
>>
>> I think that one of the primary findings from the tetralogy is that
>> Severian doesn't understand much of anything.  It's not useful to theorize
>> about him as a conscious, moral agent.
>>
>>
>>> Then again, the Hieros don't suffer from God's disability in this case,
>>> as it were.  They're not perfect beings, so they don't have to always act
>>> perfectly good.  They may see it necessary to do evil in order to do some
>>> greater good, so they may accept that Severian must destroy Urth to get to
>>> Ushas. After all, this is eschatology and genesis we're talking about here,
>>> death and rebirth.  And perhaps we're guilty of imposing a mortal,
>>> linear-time-bound morality upon beings that are not so bound.  Maybe we view
>>> death and destruction as "bad" in and of themselves, when really they're
>>> just a necessary step along the way to birth/rebirth?
>>>
>>> Lane
>>>
>>
>> Like I said in the opening of this, it's only a useful exercise if you
>> assume that morality is in some way universal.  If the Hierogrammates
>> operate on another moral level (and I see little reason to assume this -
>> they are just advanced aliens), we can just give up and go home.  However,
>> that would sound a little like the proposed solutions to the Problem of
>> Evil.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:39 PM, b sharp wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Paul B posts:
>>>>
>>>>> The fundamental moral facts in this case are that 1.) we know they can
>>>>> save
>>>>> the population of Urth and 2.) they choose not to.  This makes any
>>>>> outcome
>>>>> morally suspect according to most ethical frameworks.  As long as 1.)
>>>>> and
>>>>> 2.) are facts, the Hierogrammates cannot be good guys.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>> It is the contention of many, and I'd bet the author to be one of them,
>>>>> that
>>>>> "ethics" is not a strictly human concept.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think there is a large gap in the broad exposition of your argument,
>>>> that being that we don't need a science fiction story to find a legend
>>>> of a God
>>>> who has the power to stop all war, genocide, disease and child rape but
>>>> chooses not
>>>> to.  Extending your argument would seem to demand either that Gene Wolfe
>>>> feels
>>>> the Judeo-Christian God is morally bankrupt or that Gene Wolfe is an
>>>> atheist (or both).
>>>> I don't think either is true.
>>>>
>>>> I think any intelligent, thinking Christian eventually is troubled by
>>>> the classic problem
>>>> of an omnicient, omnipotent God who allows evil to flourish. I suspect
>>>> the Hierogrammates
>>>> and their relationship with the Increate are an attempt by Gene Wolfe to
>>>> reconcile the
>>>> contradiction (while injecting a healthy dose of science to explain
>>>> religion).
>>>>
>>>> -bsharp
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Need to know now? Get instant answers with Windows Live Messenger.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_072008
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Urth Mailing List
>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Urth Mailing List
>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

-- 
Paul Borochin
PhD student, Fuqua School
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20080710/66039cff/attachment-0002.htm>