Evil always has more utilitarian options than good
July 10, 2014 § 95 Comments
If we attempt to make what “works” – what most effectively or efficiently achieves proximate or this-worldly goals – into a fundamental criteria of politics, we always and necessarily embrace evil.
We exist right now at a particular point in the phase space of all possibilities. The choices we make determine in part, constrained by reality, where we go next. An amoral man (which is the same as an immoral man) has all materially possible choices available in his permutation space of options. A moral man has a more constrained set of choices available to him. The immoral man can as a material matter choose anything the moral man chooses; he can also choose things that the moral man will not choose. In terms of reaching proximate goals – any goal other than Heaven – the immoral man has every option that the moral man has, and many more options besides.
So an immoral man can achieve proximate goals more effectively and efficiently than a moral man in virtually every case.
In short, for an equivalently intelligent and capable person, crime does pay.
So if you are part of a political or economic movement which emphasizes “what works,” or what is practical, or what maximizes material prosperity over what is Good, True, and Beautiful — if you deliberately downplay the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in order to make alliances and get things done — you are the bad guy.