Who Could Ask For Anything More - The Relentless Pursuit of Perfection;

In philosophy, is it required to sow the seeds of your own downfall?

The question may have validity despite its Socratic nature. The prototypical "best" one in my culture is Christianity... the pattern was never better illustrated. As an adherent, is THAT characteristic of Christianity mission critical to future designs?

As an illustration, consider a war machine such as the 1983 Movie, "Wargames," with Matthew Broderick. For our discussion I will name it as I did the world's most complicated chemical in my discussion with my nephew. To point out that complicated names like "carbon-tetra-chloride," do not necessarily make complicated chemicals, we named it "Jim."

"Jim," is a war machine that is without flaw or self-destruct, as a vehicle for discussing what (in Political Theory,) is called "positive law." Historically an individual named "Cyrus," was educated by a General named Xenophon to direct just such a war machine. "Cyrus," had the best of Alexander the Great and Cyrus the Great, with flaws chosen so as to maintain the appearance of believability.

What happens when the benevolent tyrant Cyrus dies, leaving behind heirs who, (whether through inept training or defective moral fiber,) fail to be ethical within their own system, and turn it to abuse and destruction?

If it CAN destroy, MUST it be crippled with a self-destruct?

In nature, "permanent solutions to temporary problems," exist, but are pejoratively reviewed. I CAN send the smallpox virus up on a rocket bound for Jupiter. This leaves me powerless to research anti-bodies in future. I CAN successfully commit suicide (see footnote.) As a solution to most problems, even philosophy reviews suicide badly. I cite Christ, Darwin and Moses. Many notable Philosophers have done so... I believe they have also said, "Do as I say, not as I do."

To balance the viewpoint that permanent solutions are bad, please consider that a Pareto perfect solution makes the related problem obsolete... it doesn't happen anymore in nature, and so the solution is permanent.

We often pass laws on this basis: It was bad and it happened to ME, so I _want_ to say authoritatively, "It will NEVER happen to anyone else." This is another context of the permanent solution.

Our worst weapons are equipped with self-destruct mechanisms so that we may initiate the process on a schedule, but retain the ability to abort execution until the last minute. An example of this principle in business is as follows. I have a mission critical recording compilation I need to have in Nashville for Tuesday. I put it in the US Post or other priority delivery, and then use all other efforts to pass it on the way, by electronic transmission. At this point, even if I die, my recording makes it to Nashville. In Nashville, I don't HAVE to do anything with it. This is good redundancy. (In business inefficiencies due to redundancy are so common that CEOs do not know its virtues until you cite the triple redundancy of Space Shuttle safety features.)

An example of a weapon that cannot be crippled in this way is the old Submarine torpedo. The radio signals that cannot connect them to military commanders for disarming OR deceit, has the same effect on torpedo communications. While a commander might "put a fish in the water," he cannot "call it off," once "the dogs are running," (a hunting term.) His last consideration is one of determining conclusively that he doesn't intercept his own fish.

For this reason, ethical requirements on Submarine Captains are restrictive like Root authority on a Unix box. Their equals on earth (to my mind) are municipal Police detectives, and well qualified High School Algebra instructors. When politics lose purchase, you may as well, "hang up your spurs." God's will be done ;-)

I am interested to have a conversation on the topic with anyone inclined to discuss it. I don't have a book with the answers in the back, and I haven't worked this one out yet.


I rationalize that the following footnote makes the decision one of CHOICE!

Footnote: To reliably commit suicide, use a .22 caliber sidearm. The projectile penetrates the skull, but CANNOT exit. Any remaining energy is dissipated by ricocheting around inside the skull. The resulting "Stroke," (brain hemorrhage) is SO catastrophic that failure (in the form of Vegetable survival) doesn't happen. Vegetables happen from ambitious persons compensating for small boobs or penises by over-reaching and using a caliber that exits, taking part of the brain, (an organ that is so redundant that the correct 10% will reliably carry the entire workload,) with it.

Now please explain to me why we need a special law to authorize doctors to end patients chosen only by the most tortured bureaucratic process, in order to satisfy ethics that do not reference moral law as definitive. I separate Morals and Ethics in a separate article.