The Pandemic Dilemma

We are witnessing a “pandemic dilemma” similar to the classic “prisoner’s dilemma.” A growing number of people want to be “liberated” from stay-at-home orders, including apparently, President Trump. The desire to end coronavirus restrictions is reasonable. People need to get back to work and get on with their lives.

But if we end stay-at-home restrictions too soon, the pandemic will continue and we’ll need more restrictions. Cooperation is necessary, along with a long-term perspective. Selfish action in the short term will prevent us from getting what we desire in the long run.

The Problem of an Early Win

Pandemic restrictions have apparently worked. The curve is “flattening.” Although the number of deaths is appalling, this has fallen short of the most-dire predictions. That’s good news. But the effectiveness of stay-at-home orders makes it seem that they are not necessary.

It is tempting to declare a win too early. The permanent solution involves vaccines and effective treatments. The stay-at-home strategy only slows the spread of the disease. If everyone stays home, the threat decreases. It will then seem that there is no need to stay home. But to re-open things too soon will increase the pandemic risk. That would make it necessary to extend stay-at-home orders.

Short-term thinking will lead to long-term problems.

Cheating can be Contagious

As the threat dissipates, there will be more cheaters and resisters. The irony of this is that cheating and resisting may prolong the pandemic.

The longer this goes on, the more likely a further negative spiral. As patience wears thin more people will be tempted to cheat and protest. But a resurgent pandemic would lead to an extended need to stay at home.

As frustration increases, cooperation decreases. If you are staying at home, you will view defectors with resentment—but also maybe a bit of envy. Resentment causes distrust and polarization. The resisters view those staying at home as mindless sheep. The stay-at-homers view the resisters as ignorant fools. Cooperation becomes difficult.

The Problem of Polarization

Polarization in the United States was already a problem. This crisis has amplified it. Some trust science. Others do not. Some think the president’s incompetence has made the crisis worse. Others think that this is a “deep state” campaign to bring Trump down.

Our divisions will likely intensify as the economic and political consequences of the pandemic unfolds. When distrusts grow, there is a tendency to focus on short-term self-interest, while blaming others. This makes cooperative action more unlikely, which causes a further negative cycle.

Hopelessness exacerbates distrust and makes it difficult to focus on long-term cooperation. These negative feedback loops make long-term success seem farther away. At some point, people begin to shrug and say “what the hell, might as well join the cheaters.” When the Titanic is sinking and there is no hope for rescue, you might as well enjoy the ride (a point I’ve made in more detail elsewhere).

If that happens, we really are sunk.

The Solution

Philosophers have long pondered the problem of cooperation. One source is Hegel. I won’t bore you with the details. But in Hegel’s “master-slave dialectic,” when rival parties struggle for recognition, they end up failing to get what they want.

The solution is a more robust sense of community. This is similar to the solution of the classic prisoner’s dilemma, where two people struggle to choose wisely when they lack information and trust. The solution is solidarity and trust, along with a shared source of information.

Hope is also essential. We need a reason to hope that things will improve when we work together. The good news is that there is a reason for hope: cooperative action has slowed the pandemic.

Community, truth, and hope are cherished goods of human life. Without them, we are thrown back into a chaotic world, where narrowly focused self-interest prevents us from cooperating and actually getting what we want. Philosophers have made it clear what the solution is. But building community is up to us. We, the people, must choose to cooperate, seek truth, and find reasons to hope that in the long run solidarity pays off.

December 15, 2019April 12, 2020

Never too young to change the system, never too old to hope

Fresno Bee, December 15, 2020

The United Nations commemorated Human Rights Day on Dec. 10 with a focus on youth leadership and voice. The UN notes that young people have often been marginalized and ignored. But youth movements are also in the forefront of social change. The motto of this year’s UN’s Human Rights campaign is, “never too young to change the world.”

Youth power is on the rise. Students have taken to the streets in Hong Kong and in climate action strikes around the globe. A 34-year-old woman, Sanna Marin, became prime minister of Finland. And Time recognized 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg as the magazine’s Person of the Year.

Our irascible president reacted to this last development with an insulting tweet directed at Thunberg. He said that Thunberg should work on her anger management issues and just chill out.

Grumpy old Scrooges have often told young people to chill out. They view youthful outrage as a pathetic phase. They mock youthful impatience to fix a broken world.

At the global climate change summit in Madrid, Thunberg said, “The change we need is not going to come from the people in power.” She said world leaders are betraying us by failing the fix the climate crisis.

Young people have often accused their elders of betrayal. The youth refuses to accept a broken system. They won’t tolerate the hypocrisies of business as usual.

Old folks view all of this as naïve. When you grow up, they say, you will grow out of your idealism. But young people don’t know any better. They don’t know enough, yet, to doubt their dreams.

This self-righteous enthusiasm typically fades over time. We mellow with age. Experience shows us patterns that repeat themselves. Those patterns become ruts, familiar and confining. You grow weary of struggle. You prefer stability. You become skeptical of revolution.

REVOLUTION IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER

For the youth, however, things look different. The audacity of youth is hopeful, creative and in love with the possible. Each moment is a new opportunity. The patterns are not familiar. There are no ruts to fall into. Revolution is waiting just around the corner.

These are stereotypes, of course. Some oldsters are radical and hopeful. And some youngsters are cynical. There is nothing sadder, I think, than a young person without hope. And there is something inspiring about old folks who encourage the youth to dream.

Consider Socrates. He was accused of corrupting the youth. He was executed at age 72 for daring to encourage the youth to think for themselves – about politics, religion, and the meaning of life. More recently, at age 79, the French philosopher Alan Badiou wrote a book explaining his desire to “corrupt the youth” by turning them away from a typical life spent in endless pursuit of power, money and gratification.

Badiou calls on us to live “a true life.” That would be a life of wisdom that is deeply critical of the hypocrisies of the status quo. To corrupt the youth is to help them become authentic. This means, “to try to ensure that young people don’t go down the paths already mapped out, that they are not condemned to obey social customs, that they can create something new.”

This “something new” is the key to hope. We don’t know what the youth will give birth to. Hope embraces an unknown future, betting that whatever comes tomorrow will be better than today. This is the attitude of youth: a reckless embrace of the future that is not cowed by convention.

Philosophy is not alone in embracing the audacity of youth. The message of youth power is appropriate at Christmas. Christianity began as a youth movement. Mary was a teenage mother, after all. And Jesus was only 33 when he was crucified. It was the old establishment that left Mary out in the cold and rejected the gospel of love.

So let’s hear it for corrupting the youth and empowering them to change the system. The system is broken. Its old cronies are bitter Scrooges and angry Trumps. But something beautiful and different is waiting to be born, if we let it. You are never too young to change the world. And you are never too old to hope.

October 6, 2017November 18, 2017

Fortitude and Resilience in the Face of Tragedy

Right now fortitude is needed more than fantasy.
Admit fears, shed tears, get back to work

Fresno Bee, October 6, 2017

It feels like the world is falling apart. Hurricanes, earthquakes, and massacres clog the headlines.
Even El Capitan recently crumbled.

Of course, the rocks have always been falling. Each new hurricane and earthquake is a reminder of our fragile place on this spinning globe. Each new outburst of cruelty is a reminder of the human capacity for evil.

We cannot give up hope. But dark times need fortitude more than fantasy. Fortitude is grounded in a clear-eyed assessment of the world. This old-fashioned virtue has other names: grit, resilience, tenacity, and courage. Fortitude helps us face danger and endure stress. It gives us the energy and audacity to confront adversity.

Fortitude is solid and realistic, while hope is insubstantial and ethereal. The hopeful live in a world of “maybe.” Maybe after this hurricane season, we’ll take climate change seriously. Maybe after Vegas, we’ll take gun control seriously. Maybe next time, we’ll do things differently.

FORTITUDE IS GROUNDED IN A CLEAR-EYED ASSESSMENT OF THE WORLD.

It is possible that things will improve. But they won’t improve without hard work and common sense. Unrealistic hope is delusional. And hope without labor is merely hot air.

Reality is immune to our desires. Death and suffering are as pervasive as ignorance and selfishness. We need to accept the inevitable and focus on things that are actually in our control. We can regulate our efforts and subdue our fears. Beyond that lies fortune and fate.

Moderate fatalism is not a recipe for despair. Despair dwells in the negative and broods over misery. The risk of hope is that it gives way to despair when the hoped-for dream does not arrive.

The truth is that things are mixed. The earth is not static. Evil people exist. But so too do heroes, mothers and martyrs. Right now someone is dying; but someone else is being born. Someone is lonely; but someone else is falling in love. This vast world contains a multitude.

Reality includes hurricanes and earthquakes. It also includes tranquility, beauty and joy. We ought not let outrage and anxiety destroy our enjoyment of life’s bounty.

Our spirits will break if we try to take in all of the suffering of the world. This does not mean that we can ignore other people’s pain. But it does mean that compassion is a finite good. Help the victims if you can. But understand that grief and sorrow are local affairs.

Recent tragedies seem overwhelming. But there is always bad news somewhere. The media magnifies calamity. Catastrophes attract our attention.

It is wise to control your consumption of news. If the news is bothering you, turn it off. If you want good news and inspiration, look for it. Common decency is the unexceptional background condition of normal life. Talk to a neighbor. Or call an old friend. Most people are doing OK most of the time.

The ancient Greeks taught that evil can be endured and that good is easily obtained. They advocated moderation and courage. The Christians added faith, hope and love. It is sometimes useful to “let go and let God.” But grit and determination remain important. Fortitude was celebrated by Aquinas and others in the Christian tradition.

IT IS WISE TO CONTROL YOUR CONSUMPTION OF NEWS. IF THE NEWS IS BOTHERING YOU, TURN IT OFF.

Fortitude requires vigilance and prudence. It is prudent to prepare for disaster. But vigilance is not fear. Courage depends upon a sense of proportion that prevents panic. With preparation, some ills can be avoided. And many evils can be endured with patient resolve.

A sense of proportion puts anxiety in its place. The world continues to hum along after each quake, storm, and massacre. This bigger picture provides a source of hope. It is true that this too shall pass.

The big picture also makes us humble and forgiving. El Capitan crumbles on occasion. So too does the strongest man. We are all vulnerable. Our common fragility is the source of solidarity.

Share your strength when you can. But be modest about compassion. No one is strong enough to shoulder all of the suffering of the world.

In the end it is our resilience that is the source of progress. It is what we do after a disaster that actualizes hope. Comfort the afflicted. Lick your wounds. Admit your fears. Wipe away your tears. And then get back to work.

December 9, 2015February 11, 2016

Morality and the drought

Moral lessons from the drought

Fresno Bee, December 9, 2015

Special Report: From drought to El Niño
Columnist Andrew Fiala says drought exposes conflicting ideas

Scarcity prompts moral reflection. Imagine a group of hikers lost in the desert with limited water. How do they share the water? Perhaps you should share the water equally. Or maybe the thirstier person should get more water, or the person who owns the bottle – or the youngest or weakest.

There are conflicting intuitions about such cases. Drought exposes conflicting ideas about property rights, liberty, justice and communal good. Here are some moral insights that can guide our thinking about droughts and other conditions of scarcity.

1. Droughts challenge civilization. The oldest written code of law in the world – Hammurabi’s Code – contained rules and punishments for maintaining a system of irrigation. Agricultural civilizations require a complex division of labor, bureaucratic control and obedient citizens. Droughts challenge this system. Droughts have caused civilizations – such as the Anasazi of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico – to collapse. Drought prompts reflection on the fragility of civilization and the importance of stable, resilient social systems.

2. Environmental justice matters. Droughts create suffering, poverty, unemployment and homelessness. Successful responses must be fair. We owe special care for the weak and vulnerable. Resentment grows when some go thirsty while others thrive. Drought reminds us to focus questions of fairness and justice.

3. Egoism is immoral. A thirsty egoist may feel resentful or envious. Those with money and water may feel a similar sense of entitlement. But egoism is immoral. A selfish desert hiker who sneaks a drink is stealing water from the mouths of others. It is immoral when selfish owners of water refuse to share – or engage in price-gouging or wasteful water use. Drought shows the insufficiency of egoism.

4. Collective action limits liberty. A world of egoists left alone to pursue their own self-interests could end up destroying shared resources or creating resource wars. That is why law and regulation are needed. However, in a free country and a capitalist economy, we value liberty. Regulation limits liberty, including imposing limits on what we can do with our own property. Free people resent such limitations. Others suspect that regulation is manipulated by the rich and powerful. Drought exposes the conflict between individual liberty and collective action.

5. Cooperation is important. The optimal solution is cooperative self-regulation. People must limit their own liberty out of concern for others. Sharing and cooperation may sound naive. But the thirsty desert hikers will each do better if they cooperate and share. Sharing and caring are taken for granted within stable communities – and they help sustain community spirit. Drought demonstrates the importance of building and maintaining community spirit.

6. Consumption can be reduced. There is more to share when we each consume less. The lost desert hikers quickly learn that it is wrong to squander water. Scarcity causes us to reassess about how we use – and waste – things. We’ve discovered that we don’t need green lawns and long showers. We’ve learned to wash dishes, brush teeth, and flush toilets in new ways. Drought forces us to conserve water and to understand the difference between a need and a luxury.

7. Democracy is the key. When our needs are considered and our voices heard, we find it easier to cooperate – and we feel that justice prevails. Whatever way our thirsty desert hikers decide to share their water, they should each be consulted. Democratic deliberation creates cooperation and community spirit. Democratic values are tested in times of crisis, when leaders are tempted to revert to authoritarian policies. Drought should strengthen our commitment to democracy and inclusion.

8. There are reasons to hope. The good news is that 40 million Californians survived another arid summer. Moral action depends upon hope. To be inspired to do the right thing, you have to hope that others will do the right thing – and that doing the right thing will lead to good outcomes. To survive drought, you need moral hope.

So far, so good. We have limited egoism. We have developed community spirit. We have reduced consumption. We have attended to justice. And we have kept true to principles of democracy. There is always more work to be done. The rainy season provides a chance to hone our moral intuitions as we plan for the future of our hot, crowded state.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article48833525.html#storylink=cpy

November 15, 2015November 16, 2015

Random violence, education, and hope

Random acts of violence raise important questions about our culture

Fresno Bee, November 15, 2015

There are reasons for hope in the face of atrocity
Cultural violence may contribute to violent acts
Moral education provides a cure

Stories of random violence continue to shock. Gun control would decrease the carnage. But when they don’t have guns, violent young men attack with knives, as happened recently at UC Merced. The technology of murder is only partly to blame.

The deeper problem is cultural and psychological. We need to understand the seductive power of anger and aggression. And we need to remember that violence is as rare as it is stupid.

First, let’s admit that violence can be exciting. Some people enjoy shooting guns. Young men, it seems, are often fueled by a volatile mix of aggression, anger, pride and fascination with blowing stuff up.

The good news is that most of us grow out of it. Violent outbursts are remarkable because they are anomalous. Most normal people learn to sublimate aggression. Rather than hurting a stranger, we play football or video games. If we want to see things explode, we go to fireworks shows.

We also learn that moral arguments are won with words instead of weapons. We learn that violence proves nothing. Violence disrupts rational discourse, undermines mutual understanding, and destroys love and community. Proper moral development moves us beyond the childish compulsion to smash things toward the adult interest in building them.

WE OUGHT TO TEACH OUR CHILDREN THAT THERE ARE REASONS FOR HOPE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF SENSELESS ATROCITY.

Unfortunately, some parts of our culture remain focused on adolescent aggression. Violent video games, movies and music are popular among the youths. In some cases, the ideas and images of violent culture get ahold of vulnerable young minds and mayhem ensues.

No one is born a mass murderer. Destructive ideas are discovered in scripts and models found in culture. Of course, pop culture is not entirely to blame. Lots of people witness lots of violence on TV or in video games without becoming violent. But we are cultural beings. Ideas and behavior are shaped by images and education.

A growing body of research points to a correlation between violent culture and violent deeds. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry explains: “The typical American child will view more than 200,000 acts of violence, including more than 16,000 murders, before age 18.” The American Academy of Pediatrics concludes: “The strength of the association between media violence and aggressive behavior … is nearly as strong as the association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.” The American Psychological Association concludes that there is a “consistent relation” between violent video game use and aggression.

WHILE THE CAUSES OF YOUTH VIOLENCE ARE MULTIFACTORIAL AND INCLUDE SUCH VARIABLES AS POVERTY, FAMILY PSYCHOPATHOLOGY, CHILD ABUSE, EXPOSURE TO DOMESTIC AND COMMUNITY VIOLENCE, SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND OTHER PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS, THE RESEARCH LITERATURE IS QUITE COMPELLING THAT CHILDREN’S EXPOSURE TO MEDIA VIOLENCE PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE ETIOLOGY OF VIOLENT BEHAVIOR.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry statement by Eugene Beresin

The good news is that despite all of this, mass murder remains rare. Cultural violence may provide a catharsis, which allows people to satisfy the urge to destroy in virtual reality without really hurting anyone. The problem is that one person’s catharsis may be another person’s inspiration. Culture works that way. There is no singular meaning of any image or idea. This is why we need education: to teach us moral meaning.

Without proper interpretation and moral education, violent images can give the wrong message. “Romeo and Juliet” ought to be viewed as a cautionary tale about violent feuds – not as a recipe for teen suicide. Darth Vader and Hitler are villains, not heroes. And war is tragic and horrible – not a fun game. Those conclusions may seem obvious. But without education and interpretation, these lessons can be lost.

The need for moral interpretation applies to stories of recent carnage. These stories can leave us feeling that the world is a dangerous and ugly place and that the bad guys are winning. This fear can cause even normal people to want to escalate violence as we feel the need to fight fire with fire.

Education about atrocity can help to calm our reactionary impulse. The reality is that mass shootings and terrorist attacks remain rare. More people are killed in car accidents than are murdered by strangers.

The most important lesson of random violence is the outrage of the majority and the courage of the survivors. The vast majority is appalled by violence. We understand that aggression is absurd, violence proves nothing, and the cure for hate is love.

We ought to turn off the TV, find ways to channel youthful aggression, and keep guns away from madmen. We also ought to teach our children that there are reasons for hope, even in the face of senseless atrocity.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/article44767614.html#storylink=cpy