Thursday, February 16, 2006
Words Need Meanings
It seems to me that we have two trends in this culture that are diametrically opposed. The first is the trend towards moral relativism. You no, the bottom line statement "That's truth for me." The second is increasing bureacratization.
Why are these trends opposed? Well, in relativism, words have no meaning except what a person assigns to it. Thus you get statements like the enormously silly, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Bureaucracies on the other hand thrive based on precisely defining categories, meaning labels or words.
This is in stark view in the case of Haleigh Poutre. Her life and possible death literally hinges on the label attached to her, whether she is in a "persistent vegatative state" or she is "medically stable."
Is the futility of this situation not apparent? The bureacracy will kill her based on the label, but the label appears to have no objective meaning - that means that her death would be entirely arbitrary. Is it any wonder that spectacles like what surrounded the death of Terri Schiavo would happen.
The relativists would defend this state by saying it is "based on the science," but if the science cannot establish an objective definition, or alternately they define a category that defies objective definition, what they really do is garner power.
When human lives are literally at stake, can we afford such a chaotic state?
Related Tags: Haleigh Poutre, life and death, relativism, bureacratization, chaos
Why are these trends opposed? Well, in relativism, words have no meaning except what a person assigns to it. Thus you get statements like the enormously silly, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Bureaucracies on the other hand thrive based on precisely defining categories, meaning labels or words.
This is in stark view in the case of Haleigh Poutre. Her life and possible death literally hinges on the label attached to her, whether she is in a "persistent vegatative state" or she is "medically stable."
DSS said Haleigh was "medically stable" when she arrived at Franciscan on Jan. 26. Doctors at Franciscan have said patients receive three kinds of therapy daily.The before and after difference is not in her symptomology, but in who is making the diagnosis and in impending court actions.
DSS had said Haleigh was in a persistent vegetative state for months while she lay in a Springfield hospital bed.
Is the futility of this situation not apparent? The bureacracy will kill her based on the label, but the label appears to have no objective meaning - that means that her death would be entirely arbitrary. Is it any wonder that spectacles like what surrounded the death of Terri Schiavo would happen.
The relativists would defend this state by saying it is "based on the science," but if the science cannot establish an objective definition, or alternately they define a category that defies objective definition, what they really do is garner power.
When human lives are literally at stake, can we afford such a chaotic state?
Related Tags: Haleigh Poutre, life and death, relativism, bureacratization, chaos
