Technocratic vs. moral

The technocratic and managerial is perhaps the only unquestioned problem-solving common idiom we have, and in it we experience the world as put in order by us and therefore manipulable.

In morality we experience the world as binding desire and announcing an order to which we must be conformed. This order is not as a factual given like “we only have so much money to finish the study”, since I can desire my monetary constraints weren’t there and work to eliminate them, but part of being a moral constraint is to the need to accept it and to never work against it. The technocratic is in the service of desire while the moral is a constraint upon desire. Outside heaven, what good is a morality that only commands what everyone was already doing and wanted to do?

It’s easy enough to see why we are in love with what extends our will and fulfills it more perfectly, but the flip side of this is recognizing the aversion we have to what restricts will and put it under constraint. The first sort of fact will get praised forever for all its wonders and benefits, and how it has thrown the light on all the plain facts of the world. But all the praise we heap on it should alert us to a temptation we have to ignore, downplay, or dismiss as subjective the facts which are just as plain but which push back against desire and deny it something it wants.


%d bloggers like this: