The quest for a satisfactory outcome when it is clear that only a minimally frustrating outcome is possible is a symptom of human and political madness. To quest for the impossible is lyrically wonderful, but essentially suicidal.
Frustration is basically that phenomenon which arises when the quest for satisfaction is thwarted, and since perfect satisfaction can only exist in a perfectly satisfying situation, frustration is unlikely to ever be absent from us. This is of interest to us all; however it is of significant interest within politics where frustration can lead to global calamity.
It is doubtful whether anyone is completely free from frustration at all times. At best we have minimal frustration for short periods only. Long term freedom from frustration is less common and permanent freedom from all frustration is probably reserved for those who have no capacity for being frustrated; computers and the dead for example.
The desire for the capacity for absence of frustration without being dead is I suggest a primary driver to have a solid foundation for logic and a mind of pure reason; the perfect computer.
Some would posit that the perfect computer would surely be a better authority than the imperfect government consisting of human politicians. Thankfully, since the origins of computers are in the minds of humans with frustration in-situ, it is illogical to presume their will ever be a perfect authoritarian computer.
The potential perfection of such a computer was frustrated by the imperfect, frustration-touched conception of the perfect computer that originated in us; creatures that have minimal frustration for short periods only.
With this said, we find ourselves at what is arguably the status quo in politics. Namely that Politics is as touched with frustration as any given individual; however unlike any given individual; the frustration touched machinery of political government can lead to holocausts and extinctions.
It is important therefore, that if we wish to reduce the probability or possibility of holocaust and extinction we require attending to this frustration centred risk of it. To do this we require addressing the quest for satisfaction that exists in us all; and which at the governmental level can be catastrophic.
Instead of questing for personal, social and political satisfaction I put it that we ought to quest for impersonal, social and political points of minimal dis-satisfaction; non-satisfaction principle-seeking in other words.
But what would such principles look like? We could explore these for years as our species has indeed explored political principles for years. As a starting point though, I put this stimulus forward for principle construction:
We recognise that in accordance with the human condition, it is wiser to seek minimally frustrating principles for government rather than satisfactory outcomes. The quest for satisfactory outcomes is taken to be contrary to the continuity of life, whilst the quest for minimally frustrating principles for government is held to be congruent with the continuity of life. We advocate that all principles conceived be conceived in the spirit of that which is congruent with life’s continuation rather than termination.
Now, how many of us are satisfied with that stimulus; how many minimally frustrated; and who is better off?
Article Views: 2237 Report this Article