Blog 3: el dia de las ruinas.

I went and saw mind blowingly old ruins ttoday, called huaca pucllana.  I learned that there was a lot of turnover in south america: The Limas built it, were conquered by the Wari who were then overtaken by the Ichma, who fell to the Incas.  All, by the way, practiced human sacrifice.

I ate even more mind blowingly delicious cebiche today, as well as a giant avacado stuffed with veggies and aja (sauce).  It was a beautiful work of art until I destroyed it with my mouth, via a fork.

Suffice to say I don't have much if a mind left, and since I start school tomorrow this will likely prove less than ideal.

So to prepare let's repair my mind by delving into some philosophy.  You may be wondering why oh why this blog is called what it is?  What does "what then must I do" actually mean?

Well rest easy, I'll ease your troubled mind.

Made relevant to me by the great philosopher Fagrelius, the concept dates back millennia.  Perhaps most famously written by Fidor Dostoevsky, the mantra calls to mind that the appropriate reaction to an observed problem is to ask oneself how one can address said problem.  It pushes for action rather than just observation and acknowledgement

The generosity and benefit of such a mantra cannot be disputed, but I do like talking about the limits and boundaries if such a mantra.  Namely, does it represent a great and generous (optional) idea, or a duty of the human condition? Secondly, does it allow you to not do anything when you don't see a wrong, or does the call to action confer an impulse to do something even when you cannot find something to do? IE, never do nothing, find something to do!!

I'll discuss the first today, the second later.
I believe that there are two impulses to act: intrinsic and extrinsic.  Intrinsic can include things like ideas of universal moral code, personal codes and commitments, etc.  Extrinsic includes things like social norms, laws, Etc.  I personally believe in absolute truth and all that jazz, meaning there are tenants of a universal moral code, though I readily admit that it is a lot more disagreed on than agreed on (which negates the universality of the parts in question, no?). As such I believe it is a lot simpler than others argue (my version is .... can you guess....Love.  Always.).

Therefore, as we revisit the scope of Fidor's mantra, I remind you that there are a lot of things that are not recognized as "universally morally awesome" but are definitely recognized as great and generous optional ideas.   I contend that in this instance, should you desire to elevate the action to universal status, you cannot rely on changing every individual's intrinsic motivation.  It will be sporadic and will lapse.  Always (mostly).  However, you can rely on the extrinsic.  Namely, if you can change the social norms you achieve functional universal status.

So to answer the question: I believe that the application of this mantra is a duty for me, and I would like to see it universally applied.  To do so I intend to actively attempt to change my surrounding social norms by publicly expressing my expectations and disappointments.

Thoughts?