Can a person be truly neutral? Would a person want to be neutral if they could? What is neutrality and why would one want to break from impartiality?
Neutrality seems to be the ability to look at a situation and judge the appropriateness of action based on who is in the right and not who you would like to be in the right. To be neutral on what is right and what is wrong is to be neutral on the conceptions of right and wrong, that is it is not because it is Christian, secular, philosophic, cultural, or individual--but because you have used your judgment to determine its validity. Being neutral requires putting yourself aside even if the situation you are judging puts you in an unfavorable light. One has to have no bias whatsoever. So even on reason itself one would have to be unbiased. If there is no reason, no morals, no sides--whatsoever, then there is obviously something wrong. With this, it seems pretty clear one would not want to be completely neutral. But, then what would one want to be? One would want to be just, that is to render the same judgement for one's brother as for a stranger. But then is that just? No, one would be compelled to treat one's brother with more consideration than a stranger. The reasons are many for the reader to consider and that I will not go into them. Can a person be truly neutral, probably not, would they want to--almost certainly not. A person would want to be neutral insofar as the actions one takes correspond to values that are not person specific. If it is the charge to not harm your enemy, then you will not harm any enemy. If it is the charge to be productive, then all should be productive. This seems to be what the impartiality part of justice is, to apply rules equally, so we shall take sides based on what we deem best and not on any other judgment. If you like this post take it with you, if you don't throw it away, it's just one man's opinion, inform yourself with good ones.
No comments:
Post a Comment