Is Subjective Equal to Objective?

Dear Classical Wisdom Reader,

I remember the day vividly. I had moved to Moscow unwisely in the middle of winter, and finally, around four months later, the first real spring day had arrived. The sun bore her rays magnificently, forcing the city’s residents into an ant-like procession, navigating small trails between the remaining ice blocks and the rapidly increasing streams. It was a glorious day.

I remember it clearly because it was only -5 C (23 F) and so, for the first time since I had come to Russia, I didn’t need to wear a hat.

How liberating it felt!

And yet, if you were to take me right now to the Falkland Islands (or Malvinas as they like to say here), then I would most definitely need a hat… even though on this summer’s day it’s only 9 C (49 F).

Indeed, trying to decide what to wear, based on the abstract numbers provided to us on a daily, or hourly, basis is always a feat… that’s because the objective reality does not always coincide with our subjective experience.

It may say 13 C (55 F) on my app, but I don’t need a jacket, let alone a sweater, in the piercing sun. Likewise a predicted ‘warm’ day won’t be enjoyed coat-free if the wind picks up from the south, straight from a penguin’s breath.

And while weather might be the most obvious example, this objective/subjective dilemma can be seen in numerous ways… even in your own responses!

To quote Peter, a reader:

“Excellent remarks, content, formatting, and selection of readers’ answers to your questions. Their responses are a reflection of the value of you, your family of contributors, and your raison d’etre: the mission in life you all exist for.

And the breadth of your followers’/audience’s opinions reflect the Indian parable of the blind, wise men surrounding a creature they had never seen or experienced.

They were asked to touch, describe and identify, ‘what is it’?

Needless to say, all of their conclusions were different and relative to where they stood around the elephant.”

No matter your situation, the elephant is still an elephant… however your actions, supplies or worries completely change depending on whether or not you’re at the pitcher’s… or the catcher’s end.

This is a problem that was puzzled by the ancients (like most good questions are), and (like most good answers), their views were widely diverse. The A=A of Aristotle versus Plato’s/Socrates’ belief in the almost constant fallacy of our human perception, spring to mind.

But I want to know what you think, dear reader, especially in a world of fake news, continuously new information and extremely different viewpoints…

At what point is our subjective view equal or more important than the objective reality? What does Truth matter if it doesn’t impact us? Should we act according to our perceptions and individual experiences? Do we have a choice?

As always, you can write me directly at anya@classicalwisdom.com or comment below.

Now, on to today’s reader responses on which government governs best? See your fellow Classics lovers musings below... 

All the best,
Anya Leonard

Founder and Director

Classical Wisdom and Classical Wisdom Kids

P.S. If you missed my earlier missive regarding my mistake - you can regard this as a friendly notification that our shop items are back in stock!

You can select from our full shop - including our limited first edition Essential Classics - a book 100 years in the making - here: 

---

Monday Mailbag

Re: What Government Governs Best?

Hi Anya!

I was born and live in Argentina. On Sunday 19 I voted for Milei, who became the new elected president of my country, because I’m fed up with corruption, lies and poverty on behalf of democracy and the rule of the majority. 

Democracy, the same as religion, adopts many ways, some are good and some are evil. In the name of democracy many terrible things have been done, but I’m not sure that nowadays there are other types of governments which are best for people living in a country such as ours.

Hopefully our elected president will result in a true statesman and we will be able to leave behind these decadent and sad years of Peronism/populism. 

Florencia C.

-

Dear Anya,

I think there are two kinds of government here which might overlap in some people's minds, and others might not distinguish at all. We think of government as a force, something that maintains power through the police and army, and this is part of it. But all politics, the art of power, is built on cultural foundations. We might call this primordial aspect of power « moral government », as to distinguish it from the use of force that follows unwritten, agreed upon conventions. These comprise social standards and tacit rules usually derived from a sense of national history. 

I think what Thoreau meant when he spoke of less government, was less of the former. I think the problem of our age, is a complete absence of the latter, which many political thinkers of our past would have taken for granted- i.e., that people would all worship the state gods or god, that the foundations of a society could not be radically altered and it still function, and that allegiance to the political ideal (democracy, monarchy) was generally the default and historically-derived. What Thoreau meant, as one who disobeyed state power, is that the unwritten laws of human cooperation are those under which it would be ideal to live, not those which are forced.

Plato and Aristotle both understood the danger of democracy in a system where equals were not genuinely equal- and it was both their observation that all people cannot be made equal via government. We live in a system where we are convinced of our equality (although we are clearly not all equally thinking political decision-makers) but uncertain of everything else. Our only governing social standard is a vague idea of equality, which overrides any other common feeling. Yet there is nothing common about it at all.

Regards, 

Nick

-

You must know, “What is the proper role of government?” before asking “What is the best form of government” to perform that role.

Because the government enforces its policies on its citizens, you must know what action of a person or group deserves to be met by use of government force. A person or group only deserves to be subject to government force if that person or group interferes, or tries to interfere, with the action of a citizen without getting that citizen’s voluntary consent.

The “proper role of government” is then to prevent or punish that person or group. “The best form of government” is one that enshrines the right of each individual person to live one’s life in voluntary cooperation with others.

Robert H.

Enjoyed your article.  It seems that there is no perfect government, unfortunately.  While democracy is probably better than the rest, it needs some modifications. Namely the government in the country is way too large and absolutely not responsible for any accountability.

A smaller and a more accountable government would help.  Our government represents a much larger percentage of our GDP than it should.

Throughout my life I have been taxed and have received little value for the support (Taxes) I am forced to pay.  I am now getting some of my S/S and Medicare back.

Unfortunately, every dollar I paid for these benefits has been taxed when paid and again when I get some of it back.  Yes, I know that the government that originally promised it was a trust for each individual's benefit, has determined it to be just another tax for them to spend as they choose. (i.e. SSI, Medicaid)

The only solution to save some form of democracy is to allow voting ONLY by those whose money the government is spending.  We have reached the point where everyone votes and those benefiting from government handouts (they are in the majority) vote for more handouts and more government. (Lots of frictional losses). 

It is too easy to spend someone else's money! If this doesn't change, democracy as we know it will fail.  Who is John Gault?

Regards,

Jim R.

-

Dear Anya,

Your post about the best possible form of government is spurring me to write to you personally --  mostly for you to judge whether we should enlarge the discourse among your members.

Short form answer: The best form of government is the one that governs on the basis of self-imposed rules of economic justice. In this system, The Government -- after much vetting - declares a set of economic rights and responsibilities and The Market executes them.

If you have time, you can get a better view at: An Overall View of Concordian Economics.

Happy  Thanksgiving,

Carmine 

-

As a Christian I know the final government type for the New Earth and that is a monarchy with the Son of God in charge as eternal king. Meanwhile in this fallen world the least worst form of government is a republic modeled after the US Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and operating under God’s Natural Law.  A republic can never exist anywhere else in the world because there is no possibility any other nation can ever embrace this approach.

The American experiment has now failed because the occupants are no longer moral nor respect nor even remember Judeo Christian moral standards. The checks and balances required for it to function have been systematically eradicated with imperial fascist rule now deemed the new normal. Franklin was right. A republic if you can keep it. An immoral people don’t.

Charles F.

-

I always read Bill Bonner’s and Joel’s wisdom on economics, the dismal science! You are on their frequency. Personally, I favor the chaos theory of everything. There is order in chaos but it takes a keen eye to find it. Whether the election in Argentina leads to more chaos is, as you write, an experiment in the unfolding dismal science?

I researched Zeno after you mentioned him in a prior email. As a stoic myself when not being a Buddhist, it caught my fancy that he committed suicide in a strange manner. He tripped and fell down some steps so he took this as a sign that the gods or whatever were calling him home. Supposedly, he strangled himself to death by holding his breath until he expired. As I practice holding my breath in the mornings I find this hard to swallow. After some practice I can now hold my breath for 2 and 1/2 minutes. My lungs can’t help but force me to take a breath of relief when I reach my maximum effort. This is not to brag as the breath holding record is 23 minutes, by a man who was able to put himself into a kind of cationic state.

He must have had an accomplice?

The point of this diversion being: If you love Argentina, hold your breath after the election for as long as you can as no doubt there will be chaos?? But maybe there will be some order in the chaos which Bill, Joel. And the Classical Wisdom Guru can find.

Randolph

Ps: spell GURU slowly and you will discover your Guru!

---

For those of you who know Joel Bowman... and even for those of you who don’t... you will enjoy this weekend’s event on the Death of Literature. We’ll discuss the past, present and future for literary fiction.

Make sure to reserve your spot here: https://death-fiction.eventbrite.ie/