I am against the Death Penalty. I rejoice that Bin Laden was killed. "Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself." (Whitman)Others maintained that an emotional response was incorrect. Even if it feels good, it is morally wrong to celebrate another's death. And of course, most just gave into the momentary euphoria and celebrated a victory without second thoughts; it was the first good news in a while.
I'm not sure what my position is, or what the Stoic position might be. Seneca writes in his essay On Anger:
If anger was sufferable in any case, it might be allowed against an incorrigible criminal under the hand of justice: but punishment is not matter of anger but of caution. The law is without passion, and strikes malefactors as we do serpents and venomous creatures, for fear of greater mischief. It is not for the dignity of a judge, when he comes to pronounce the fatal sentence, to express any motions of anger in his looks, words, or gestures: for he condemns the vice, not the man; and looks upon the wickedness without anger, as he does upon the prosperity of wicked men without envy.From this, I think it's clear that at least Seneca would be cool with taking out Bin Laden. However, justice is to be carried out emotionlessly. Seneca warns against anger, but perhaps this also applies to jubilation.
Maybe.
Seneca warns against anger because anger is so destructive, as he details in chapter after chapter of his treatise On Anger. To me, it's not clear that happiness is destructive or harmful in any substantial way. We can celebrate good news. Happiness over the defeat of an evil enemy isn't a moral statement; it is not a step on the road to moral ruin. It's just happiness, and that's one thing we need more of.
No comments:
Post a Comment