Five-statement True-or-False Quiz
All “True:” You agree that mutual respect in effecting choices should govern governance in the nation in which you live.
- Human beings have no choice but to effect choices (i.e., choose among perceived alternatives and take action to bring that choice to fruition). In fact, we are always effecting a choice in the sense that we are doing one thing and not some other thing we could potentially be doing — not without consequences, perhaps. We all face different constraints on the choices we could effect, even to a debilitating extent, but that does not change the fact that we humans are choice-effecting beings.
- That makes choosing integral to being human. It is necessarily a part of being human — an “unalienable,” if you will, part of being human.
- To recognize one another as fellow humans we must respect the capacity of other people to choose — beginning with choosing whether/how/to what extent to be involved whenever any choice is being effected. ‘Equality’ is superfluous: all that matters is that the beings involved are humans. To act otherwise, to involve any other person(s) without their involvement being sufficiently informed and voluntary, is to assert by such actions that they are not (fully) human.
- Since both the determiner of this ethic (that people have no choice but to effect choices) and its referents (actions undertaken in effecting any choice that involve in any way any other human beings) are contained within material existence, going outside or beyond material existence to any immaterial, personal truth to justify denying the applicability of this ethic — its protections or its obligations — to any person(s), including oneself, is legitimately de-legitimated. No one can legitimately justify violating this ethic at any time for any reason in any way, shape, or form by appealing to any belief, intuition, ‘feeling’, etc.
- Unlike any ethic involving any appeal to any immaterial truth — which can only be a personal truth — this ethic has the commonality needed for an ethic to govern a society/nation of people with diverse immaterial, personal truths regarding governance legitimately. We all experience for ourselves that human beings have no choice but to effect choices. Personal truths will always inform people’s participation in the politics of any nation, but all such truths lack the commonality needed for legitimately governing the governance of a society/nation populated with people with diverse personal truths regarding governance.
Anyone who responded “True” to all of those statements agrees that mutual respect in effecting choices is the ethic that should govern the governance of any society/nation regarding governance. That means individuals governing themselves in effecting choices as well as the structure and functioning of the political process and the economy. The political process is the process of effecting choices for the community as a whole — which communities must do as surely as individuals must. The economy is the process of producing and acquiring goods and services — which is nothing but choices being effected.
For any answers of “False,” an explanation in the comments section would be appreciated — but also rebutted (if possible). Please note that it has already been explained why the assertion of any immaterial, personal truth cannot count as a valid explanation for such an answer.
more about mutual respect in effecting choices for governing governance: “Alright, Already” (here in Medium, but not behind the paywall)