It is obviously untenable to convince yourself from the perspective of moralism. "I am determined to do good, but I can't." For him, he can't cross the gap between "knowing" and "doing" alone.
It is not feasible to convince yourself from Bentham's secular utilitarianism. Contemporary utilitarianism believes that there is no difference between happiness and inferiority, and the best and happiest choice for yourself at present is the best option. If based on this utilitarianism, then everyone will seek advantages and avoid disadvantages and pursue immediate interests. Between courage and cowardice, the latter is often the best choice.
Finally, Mr. Luo found a reason to convince himself from Mill's eternal utilitarianism. Eternal utilitarianism calculates gains and losses by "eternal happiness beyond experience". Let's not make a choice according to the immediate gains and losses, but bravely pursue virtue and dignity and get happiness.
At this point, the first chapter is over. Teacher Luo believes that eternal utilitarianism is an ideological angle that truly integrates moralism and utilitarianism. I hope we can face everything bravely from this ideological angle, don't hesitate, don't deceive ourselves and others, and make a decision calmly and bravely.
The first chapter will bypass the words "eternal utilitarianism" and "eternal happiness beyond experience". Let me give you an example to make you understand.
The train will crush four people soon. You can operate the track change to crush the side 1 person and save 4 people there.
If we deal with this situation from the perspective of secular utility, we should analyze whether changing lanes has adverse effects on ourselves, and who has greater social value, four people or 1 individual. However, no matter how it is analyzed, secular utilitarianism can get a standard answer (there is a recognized answer).
It is very simple to deal with it based on eternal utilitarianism, and it is enough to make the decision that you think is the best at the moment. Make a brave decision, and take the road under your feet, no matter where it leads. Eternal utility has no absolute right or wrong.
The core of this discussion is what is true love.
Is narcissism really love? Without a truly perfect person in the world, we will inevitably think that we are in the most important position in life and form an irresistible narcissism. Because of narcissism, it is easy for us to find and amplify other people's problems, but we seldom reflect that we are also creating the same problems; Because of narcissism, people are obsessed with using others, and all interpersonal communication is only to meet their own needs; Because narcissism makes people feel insecure, in people's eyes, everyone is a potential competitor, without friends, only enemies; Narcissism makes people full of hatred.
Is abstract love really love? Will people who love human beings get true love? Not exactly. Human beings are abstract and have no concrete objects. You don't need to focus on loving human beings, but you can also win a sense of moral superiority for yourself. But there is a price to pay for loving a specific person. Be patient.
True love is always love for a specific person. What is true love, in fact, is to tolerate other people's shortcomings, listen to other people's opinions, correct other people's criticisms, and encourage yourself to become a truly rich person.
I think the title of this article is very good, but the content is not very thorough. The direction is right, but in the end, there is still some room for methods and suggestions on how to realize true love. Take myself as an example. I can always see the advantages of my friends around me. I am really happy for their progress and don't make bad friends with others. But what kind of person am I, just a "Mr. Nice guy". I do have great endurance, but I am not smooth enough and sharp enough. Although these two words are derogatory, it is not necessarily a good thing that you are completely absent from the cosmic society. Similarly, being too tolerant is not necessarily a good thing.
Relatively speaking, I prefer a certain degree of narcissism to promote people's progress more effectively. I can't listen to others speak ill of me, so I want to be better and stronger. I can't stand him bossing me around, so I want to climb higher. Only when you have a certain social status and value by narcissism can you talk about true love. Otherwise, you are still in a dilemma that you know but can't do.
We can't get rid of narcissism completely, which will also lead to the loss of self-confidence and purpose. But we can't be too narcissistic, too narcissistic, and we are moving towards endless emptiness and poverty.
So I think "climb the peak of hatred in narcissism, and then become a truly rich person." It is more accurate to use this sentence as the core of this article.
If the ideal perfect "circle" is compared to the state of justice (as it should be), then all the less perfect "circles" in reality can be regarded as the state of justice (as it should be).
Due justice and due justice are the eternal themes of law. When the law wants to pursue fairness and justice, this kind of justice should be the justice it deserves.
The author cited the example of antigone. Antigone wanted to follow the "heaven" (love for his family) and bury his betrayer brother, but he was executed by King Creon. Creon's son died for antigone, and Creon's wife committed suicide with her son, leaving Creon alone.
Antigone wanted to bury his brother, but he didn't die. However, Creon relied on his own kingship to exercise his own justice, which led to the tragedy of the final separation of his wife and children. (Excessive use of power)
The truth of this story is that the law should move towards due justice. When the law seriously deviates from due justice, then this evil law is not a real law.
Perfect justice, that is, justice as it should be, is an objective concept, which is not a subjective design of human beings.
People in high positions should understand the boundaries of power. Just because you have rights doesn't mean you are absolute justice. Junior officials should also have the moral courage to stick to their original intentions and resist or resist the execution of unjust orders. While respecting the power owners, the general public also has the responsibility to supervise and criticize the power owners.
When we do our best, justice is still far away, and we still have hope. We will feel discouraged for a while, but we will never despair, because justice will never leave, even if we can't see it. Justice is ahead, and this is the direction we will always move forward.
In the past public cognition, criminal law was a "tool to fight crime". People often think that state power is the best, and criminal law is also a tool to protect the public. But in fact, the right to punish and kill is a kind of violence monopolized by the state. Power leads to corruption, and absolute power often leads to absolute corruption.