Sovereign Artificer
M · R · D · L · C · I
Ends are self-given, limits are treated as more than preferences, and another act was open in a physical world.
This is not a measure of personality, mental health, intelligence, or character.
Reality is taken to be physical, and reason is trusted to reach something of its structure. Observation still matters, but a demonstration of what must be so can outweigh a first look.
Some acts stay wrong even when their results are better, and the agent is treated as able to have refused them. The constraint has force, on this picture, because the person could have honored it.
Meaning is something a person institutes by commitment. Company can matter, but the authority to give a life its point stays with the one who lives it. This is not a claim that nothing is valuable.
The axes in this code
- Reality — Physicalism
- Knowledge — Rationalism
- Morality — Deontology
- Freedom — Libertarian free will
- Meaning — Creation
- Social life — Individual priority
What this stance can see
- You keep explanations answerable to a world that can resist them.
- You look for the difference between a coincidence and a reason.
- You notice when a welcome result would be bought by a wrongful act.
- You protect the thought that a person can be the source of a turn not already written.
- You take a sustained commitment to be capable of giving a life weight.
- You refuse to dissolve a person into a collective aim.
What this stance can miss
- You may decide too quickly that a physical description has already said what experience is.
- You may trust an elegant argument after the world has already spoken against it.
- You may hold a rule so firmly that the harm of keeping it leaves the picture.
- You may ignore how much of a choice arrives already shaped.
- You may underdescribe the standards a project answers to that its author did not create. This pole is not nihilism.
- You may understate debts and dependencies that were never the product of consent.
A pressure in the pairing
A pressure in this pairing: duty and an open alternative reinforce each other, and they can hide the luck already inside the ability to comply. A free refusal is not yet a full account of fairness.
Questions this combination has to face
The explanatory gap
A physicalist picture has to say what a completed physics would have done with the fact that seeing, hurting, and understanding are like something. Some physicalists treat the difficulty as a limit on our concepts. The difficulty is not yet a formal contradiction.
A made purpose and a duty not made
Instituting a purpose does not, by itself, repeal a constraint. The two claims answer different questions. Treating the pair as a contradiction would also risk the further mistake of equating created meaning with the thought that nothing matters.
Luck inside an open will
If more than one act was open, the ability to take the better one may still be a matter of luck in character, upbringing, or timing. Galen Strawson pressed a related regress: a free act seems to require a self that is already responsible for the way it chooses. The regress is a problem for this pole, not a refutation delivered by the questionnaire.
Debts that were not consented to
A strong priority for the person still meets relationships, languages, and care that no one contracted for. The profile can keep the person as a limit and still ask which of those debts are real.
Questions for reflection
- What would count as a reason to say that some part of experience is not captured by a physical description?
- Which of your convictions about the world would still stand if you had never had the relevant observations, and why?
- When you say someone should have refused, is that because a better result was available, or because the act was forbidden even if the result had been worse?
- What standard, if any, can show that a purpose you created is a bad one?
Traditions in the neighborhood
Reading, not a syllabus ranking
- Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity (1947)
- Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785)
- Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974)
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1971)
- Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism (1946)
- Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942)
Editorial family: Physicalism, created meaning, and the priority of the person.