Sure, practically, a Gam Zu l'Tovah state of mind will make me happier, but it seems so dishonest. The evidence suggests "losing my hand sucks" but my mind screams "ultimately, my life is better without a hand." And my mind screams this without any evidence or first principle upon which to rely.** Gam Zu l'Tovah is, ultimately, a philosophy of "lie to yourself".
What about the Amor Fati (roughly, "love of one's fate")? Here's a conception I can swallow. Like Gam Zu l'Tovah, it demands that you look back on life events with assent and affirmation. However, while lover of one's fate gains all the practical increases in happiness, he does without having to bear any of the truth-problems created by Gam Zu l'Tovah.
For there is no claim that one's fate is ACTUALLY the best or most pleasurable, only an imperative to love it. We are very comfortable with the notion of loving something imperfect (one's child, one's spouse, one's self, etc.) and this just asks us to do the same.
(Additionally, there is no claim to love the fate of others. Most principles which lead one to believe in Gam Zu l'Tovah imply the same for life-events which impact others. A perfectly benevolent Divine force makes not only my experience wonderful, but also that of my friends. So, when my neighbor loses his hand, I must respond (perhaps not to his face, but internally) with "it's all for the best." Amor Fati, however, only applies to one's own fate.)
I'd like to believe that the authors of the Gam Zu l'Tovah aphorism really just meant "Amor Fati" but were just saying it in slightly different words. Amor Fati is more honest and philosophically sound . . . .
------
**Unless you first assume that there is some Divine force that is actively moving every detail of your life to insure that the very best happens to you. Then you do have a principle upon which to rely. However: A. its always somewhat problematic to assume a Divine force B. additionally, it is problematic to assume that this Divine force considers you worthy of such radical kindness. Certainly seems to against the notion of reward and punishment based on virtue!
4 comments:
Welcome Back!
My dear Ben, I beleive you are mistaken in your understanding of גם זו לטובה. This phrase means that everything which HaShem does will have an eventual good come out of it. We don't say גם זו טובה we say לטובה because when people die or are killed, etc... it's not a good thing, but we must beleive that HaShem causes everything to happen for the general good of the world. The "good" outcome might not be so apparent immediately, it might not even be apparent after a long time, it might not ever be apparent, but HaShem has a plan and whatever occurs in the world for good because it all fits well into His plan. When people die, it's bad, you're right. But it's outcome or its general direction or something of the like will bring about good.
Perhaps one can explain that even if it's not good for you, for someone somewhere it is good. Therefore the "good"-ness in everything is not easily discernable.
Are you saying:
A. That though the death was bad, some good occurrence will eventually come out of it / be caused by it, which will (cumulatively, in some sense) outweigh the badness.
or
B. That though the death was bad, some good occurrence will come out of it / be caused by it, but which won't necessarily outweigh the severity of the original bad event.
If A., then we have several of the problems that I described. Specifically, it seems to conflict with our notion of reward and punishment. We don't think that God just does the absolute best for everyone all the time . . . we think He does so only for those who deserve it. Put more broadly, its evident that belief in A only works when based on some pretty important/strong theological beliefs.
If B., well, its not a particularly radical claim. Yes, all clouds do in fact have a silver lining.
I don't feel that A is a contradiction to reward and punishment because sometimes punishment is actually good for a person. Sometimes HaShem will do something bad as a means of helping the person gain his atonement in This World so that he won't be (as severly) punished in the World to Come.
We cannot gague whether a the "good" outcome of something "bad" will outweigh the badness of it, but we should realize that there is good in it. I hear your question about whether that "good" outcome will outweigh the evident bad. I am incline to say yes it will outweigh the bad in the long run.
Post a Comment