バートランド・ラッセル『反俗評論集-人類の将来』第1章(松下彰良・訳)
* 原著:Bertrand Russell: Unpopular Essays, 1950
第1章「哲学と政治(1947)」n.6
もちろん例外もあった。その最も有名な例外は、古代(ギリシア)のプロタゴラス及び近代におけるヒュームである。ふたりとも懐疑主義を抱いた結果として政治的には保守的であった。プロタゴラスは神々が存在するかどうかは知らなかった。しかし、彼はいずれにせよ(存在するにせよ存在しないにせよ)神々は崇拝されなければならないと考えた。彼によれば、哲学には教えてためになる(人を啓発する)ようなものはなく、道徳が生き残るためには、大衆(多数派)の思慮のなさや教えられたことを喜んで信じる(大衆/多数派の)態度に頼らなければならない(ということであった)。それゆえ、伝統についての民衆の力を弱めるようなことはしてはならない(のである)。 |
Philosophy and Politics, (1947), n.6Philosophers, when they have tackled the problem of preserving social coherence, have sought solutions less obviously dependent upon dogma than those offered by official religions. Most philosophy has been a reaction against scepticism; it has arisen in ages when authority no longer sufficed to produce the socially necessary minimum of belief, so that nominally rational arguments had to be invented to secure the same result. This motive has led to a deep insincerity infecting most philosophy, both ancient and modern. There has been a fear, often unconscious, that clear thinking would lead to anarchy, and this fear has led philosophers to hide in mists of fallacy and obscurity.There have, of course, been exceptions; the most notable are Protagoras in antiquity, and Hume in modern times. Both, as a result of scepticism, were politically conservative. Protagoras did not know whether the gods exist, but he held that in any case they ought to be worshipped. Philosophy, according to him, had nothing edifying to teach, and for the survival of morals we must rely upon the thoughtlessness of the majority and their willingness to believe what they had been taught. Nothing, therefore, must be done to weaken the popular force of tradition. |