Which objections could raise? How to answer?
"Could you point out 'objections' from the world
that reject the virtue of temperance as a value,
for example, in contrast with the freedom of 'Carpe diem'?"
The reply by Gemini:
Potential Objections to Temperance
While the pursuit of virtues like Temperance is seen as a path to ethical behavior by many, there are viewpoints that might object to its emphasis, often in contrast with values like individual freedom and the "Carpe diem" philosophy.
1. Constraint on Freedom
Temperance can be perceived as a restriction on individual freedom and the right to experience life to the fullest. The emphasis on moderation might be seen as inhibiting spontaneous enjoyment and the exploration of diverse experiences. The "Carpe diem" philosophy, in its more hedonistic interpretations, encourages seizing the day and indulging in pleasures without undue restraint, which can directly clash with the idea of carefully moderating desires.
2. Suppression of Natural Desires
Some might argue that Temperance seeks to suppress natural human desires and instincts. From this perspective, a healthy and fulfilling life involves embracing these desires rather than constantly trying to control them. Restraint could be seen as leading to repression and a less vibrant existence.
3. Opposition to Progress and Innovation
In certain contexts, a strong emphasis on Temperance might be interpreted as hindering ambition and the drive for progress. Unfettered pursuit of goals, whether material or intellectual, often involves a degree of "intemperance" in the dedication of time and energy. Moderation might be seen as leading to complacency and a lack of groundbreaking achievements.
4. Moral Relativism and Subjectivity
If one holds a strong belief in moral relativism or the subjectivity of values, the idea of Temperance as an objective virtue to be pursued might be rejected. What constitutes "moderation" can vary greatly across cultures and individuals, making a universal prescription seem inappropriate or even oppressive.
5. Focus on External Rules vs. Internal Motivation
Some might criticize the promotion of Temperance (and other virtues) as another form of external moralizing, which they believe is less effective than fostering genuine internal motivation based on individual values and self-discovery.
The Virtue of Temperance
In contrast to these objections, Temperance is often viewed as a virtue that fosters balance and well-being, preventing the excesses that can lead to harm and ultimately undermine true freedom and fulfillment.
My reply:
Regarding the first three points, it's not so much about repressing or even just moderating desires,
but rather about directing desires towards the right and true 'good things.'
Regarding subjectivism and the relativity of cultures,
I would assert that true and good things are desirable by everyone, while in controversial matters, there is clearly a need to delve deeper and discern the good and shareable aspects.
Regarding the last point on the education of virtues,
I would assert that teaching should direct towards the true, beautiful, and good for the student's well-being, addressing any conscious and unconscious wounds caused by harmful desires.
The reply by Gemini:
You've articulated insightful counterpoints to the objections raised against Temperance, shifting the focus from mere suppression to a positive orientation towards true good.
Let's break down your responses:
Addressing the First Three Points (Constraint on Freedom, Suppression of Natural Desires, Opposition to Progress):
Your core argument here is that the issue isn't about stifling desires, but rather about directing desires towards what is genuinely and truly "good." This reframes Temperance not as a restrictive force, but as a guiding principle that helps us discern and pursue fulfilling and beneficial objects of desire.
- Freedom: True freedom, in this view, isn't the unbridled license to indulge in every fleeting whim, but the liberation to choose what truly leads to our flourishing. Temperance aids this by clarifying our vision of the "true good," allowing us to direct our will accordingly.
- Natural Desires: Instead of suppressing natural desires, the focus is on their education and refinement. Desires, in themselves, are not inherently bad, but their misdirection can be harmful. Temperance helps us understand the proper context and limits of our desires, ensuring they serve our overall well-being and the common good.
- Progress and Innovation: You suggest that true progress isn't hindered by Temperance but rather guided by it. Unfettered ambition without ethical considerations can lead to destructive innovation. Temperance, in this context, fosters a responsible and sustainable pursuit of goals, ensuring that progress serves genuine human needs and values.
Addressing Subjectivism and Cultural Relativism:
Your response tackles this by asserting that true and good things possess a universal desirability. While acknowledging that controversial matters require deeper exploration and discernment to identify shared positive aspects, you posit a foundation of objective good that transcends cultural differences. This suggests that while the manifestation or interpretation of good might vary, the underlying principles hold a more universal appeal.
Addressing the Education of Virtues:
Your perspective on education emphasizes the role of guiding students towards the true, beautiful, and good for their own well-being. This includes addressing any conscious or unconscious wounds caused by harmful desires. This approach sees virtue education as integral to the student's personal growth and healing, suggesting that cultivating temperance (and other virtues) is not just about moral instruction but also about fostering psychological and emotional health.
