"I AM THE LAW!"
March 22, 2008
It may not have been one of the best movies, in terms of quality, but I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless. It was the spectacle mostly that I was drawn to. Then again, how can you beat a good comic-book movie? I am referring to Judge Dredd, that Sylvester Stallone vehicle in which (with that famously-crooked mouth) he delivered that emotional outburst, "I am the law!"
And speaking of law ...
Have you ever thought much about laws? What they are?
Of course I'm talking about human laws, not the natural ones.
I think it's interesting to note that, once you break it down, which is something that a true nihilist loves to do, a law is easily seen as nothing but a reflection of someone's opinion.
Laws against rape and murder are but the echoes of opinions.
Now, it is true, they are opinions that are backed up by considerable force, primarily because they are the opinions of the vast majority (most likely a ninety-nine-percent-plus majority).
But, be that as it may, the law against murder is only a reflection of the opinion of the majority, and the majority openly state (through their chosen representatives in the legislatures) that murder should be against the law, which means that they believe (that it is their opinion) that it is wrong and that it is deserving of punishment.
As an opinion, it is one thing, but as an opinion of the majority, it is quite another. A majority is a reflection of power. A ninety-nine-percent majority reflects overwhelming power.
But it still doesn't make it any less than an opinion.
The law against murder is nothing like the law of gravity. If you jump off of a high cliff or a twenty-story building, you will die, period.
If, on the other hand, you murder someone, you may or may not be punished. The chances are that you will, but it is not nearly as certain as your fate would be should you choose to jump from the hypothetical cliff.
Nature's laws are inviolable. Man's (at times) are plastic as hell.
The mere fact that man-made laws are plastic is further proof that they are rooted in nothing but opinion. By showing respect for a law, then, we merely show respect for the opinions of mankind (at least the majority of mankind).
Why am I stressing this? Why am I going on and on about laws being nothing but the opinions of the majority? Because the same majority firmly believes that laws (at least most of them) are right. The fact is that laws have nothing whatsoever to do with what is right, and everything to do with what people want. Laws are based ultimately upon nothing more than desire.
But saying this only begs another question. Why the focus on it? Laws are based upon common desires. So what? What am I getting at?
Well, quite simply, that we should say it this way. I am suggesting that we stop talking about human behaviors as right or wrong, good or evil.
As an ethical nihilist I do not believe that there is such an animal as wrong-action (unless you're doing a math problem or working a crossword puzzle).
There are only desirable or undesirable actions. There are things that we want and things that we don't want. This is reducing it to its simplest terms. And for the sake of sanity, this is what we should always do. Or, if you want to put it in a way that is perhaps a little more corny, it is the way to the real truth.
What is most fundamentally true is that we are driven by primal urges, urges that are beyond any human rationale. What those urges prompt us to do is to act in the interest of our own self-preservation. Anything that we may do in that regard (whether it be murder, rape, theft or whatever) is not wrong. It is merely what we do.
But society has it own ideas about its own self-preservation. And thus it makes laws, which is a perfectly understandable thing for it to do. If I were a society, I wouldn't hesitate to make laws. And one of those laws would address itself to the matter of truth and/or honesty.
It would be a law in my society that all members of that society speak the truth, that they be honest, in all matters. And the fact is that we are not being honest when we describe human behaviors as right or wrong. The real truth is that we are exhibiting a form of sheer laziness by speaking this way.
Could anything be more important than the matter of describing our own behaviors? Why would we want to be anything less than completely forthright and honest with such descriptions? Why would we fool ourselves?
We are creatures of desire. We should say this. We should teach it to our children. We should never hide it, or be embarrassed by it or ashamed of it. It is what we are.
I am saying essentially that things would be a hell of a lot better in human culture if we were more honest about what we truly are, instead of inventing abstractions like right and wrong, or good and evil, to account for (or to be excuses for) what we do. To use such abstractions is to virtually sweep matters under the rug, to deny what we really are and embrace lives that are guided by falsehood.