Few old ideas sound as current to
the modern ear as the idea that law enforcement can be more important than the
writing of new laws. Plato played with this idea somewhat, but it was Dèscartes
who actually laid it out in a succinct and concentrated exposition. Indeed,
good law enforcement is the centerpiece of any good legal system, and, with
this in mind, the duty of the legal system is to simplify itself to such an extent
as to make effective law enforcement feasible. Hence, the title of this entry,
utilizing a quotation from Dèscartes, and its subject proper.
***
(This is perhaps a good place to
remind the reader that, in addition to being one of the greatest philosophers
in history (the first modern philosopher, also known as father of
modern philosophy, etc.), Dèscartes was a rare mathematical genius, the
inventor of the coordinate system, and the creator of analytical geometry, as
well as a scientist. (His scientific ideas, sharing Galileo’s heresies, were
clearly stated in his great book Le Monde, which was so controversial
that he chose not to publish it. They were also laid out in other books, such
as Principia Philosophiae and L’Homme et la Formation du Foetus.)
Such versatility was, of course, not uncommon in those times, but the extremely
high level of his scientific excellence must be kept in mind always, when
considering his historical legacy in toto.)
Of several different Cartesian
themes to pursue next in this sequence, I choose his methodological genius as
represented by the principal rules, or laws, as Dèscartes calls them in
the Second Book of his Discours de la Méthode:
“As a Multitude of laws only hampers justice, so
that a state is best governed when, with few laws, these are rigidly
administered; in like manner, instead of the great number of precepts which
Logic is composed of, I believed that the four following would prove perfectly
sufficient for me, provided that I took the firm and unwavering resolution
never in a single instance to fail in observing them.---
The first
was never to take anything as true that I did not clearly know to be such; that
is to say, carefully to avoid precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise
nothing more in my judgment than was presented to my mind so clearly and
distinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt.
The second,
to divide each difficulty under examination into as many parts as possible, and
as necessary for its adequate solution.
The third,
to conduct my thoughts in such order that, by commencing with objects the
simplest and easiest to know, I might ascend step by step to the knowledge of
the more complex; assigning in thought a certain order even to those objects
which in their nature do not stand in a relation of antecedence and sequence.
And
the last, in each case to make enumerations so complete and reviews so
general that I can be assured that nothing was omitted.”
As a matter of fact, at the risk
of appearing simplistic, I completely agree with Dèscartes that having fewer
laws is better than more laws, and that a multitude of laws is much harder to
enforce than when there are few. This is by no means a platitude, as we have
the opposite situation with, say, American laws, where their multitude is considered
a sign of a higher development of the legal system. Yet the appalling downside
of this multiplicity in a justice system is the infamous difficulty of law
enforcement, with the ability of a competent lawyer to extricate the guilty on
the force of mere technicalities. (Instructively for us, there were only ten
commandments that God gave to Moses, later reduced by Jesus to just two!)
Enumerating his four precepts,
Dèscartes starts with the Cartesian Dubitandum, which we can
rephrase as Thou shalt not be brainwashed, in the sense that the
responsibility for brainwashing lies not so much with the brainwashers, as with
the brainwashed. It can be even said that in any human communication the weak
side allows itself to be brainwashed by its uncritical acceptance of everything
it is being told, and, by such acceptance, turns even an innocent counterpart
into an effective brainwasher. Dèscartes however offers us an easy recipe
against brainwashing: never to take anything as true, unless we clearly know
it to be such. I must say, though, that it takes a certain above-average
level of brain development to withstand a competent brainwashing, and
oftentimes, the task of telling apart what we “clearly know” from what
we do not know at all, is virtually impossible, as in the case of my history unknown,
ignored, and misunderstood, which I have ventured to illuminate in the Lady
section of this book.
The second precept, advising us to
divide each difficulty into as many parts as possible, is a quite modern
methodological principle, which, as we have seen, originates with
Dèscartes, who merits Nietzsche’s praise of him as one of the four greatest
methodologists in history. And so is the third precept, organically flowing
from the second one: having divided the difficulty into parts, we proceed
tackling the simplest components first, thus getting them out of the way, so
that in the end, faced with the most complicated part, we are best prepared for
the task, both in reducing our tasks to one and in gaining the maximum possible
insight into the difficulty as a whole by having completed all tasks, except
this one.
And now, the fourth precept is
the most technical of the four, but also the easiest to comprehend: we need to
make thorough enumerations in each particular case, allowing us to be aware of
any possible omissions that might otherwise elude our attention.
Having gone through this treasure
chest of methodology, the most incredible thing about its application to modern
experience is that, although all these precepts are lucid and definitely
advantageous to follow in all cases where rational thinking and sound
methodology are required, they are not followed. Furthermore, as
concerns the last precept about enumeration, I have a funny feeling that had it
been honestly contemplated to be followed, most people would not know how to
start their list, and where to end it.
No comments:
Post a Comment