Brutus: honorable man or enemy combatant? Film at 11.

Monday, cigarette #1

Brutus even dares tell his friends that if his own father returned to earth, he would kill him just the same. It was an overpowering love of country which, taking leave of the ordinary rules for crimes and virtues, hearkened only to itself and saw neither citizen, friend, benefactor, nor father. Virtue seemed to forget itself in order to surpass itself. Montesquieu, Causes of the Greatness of the Romans and Their Decline

The blog is back! After last night's paper-writing marathon, Housemate Jack suggested I start calling it "The Red Bull Drinking Blog." On the other hand, there is now senior essay where was none before.

The ladies over at Iqra'i have been picking up the slack with some very provocative posts on honor and loyalty:

Brutus has no honorable choice. In the end he chooses the one which is best for everyone else: he tries to leave his countrymen a Rome that is, if not his ideal, then better for his action.

Karras puts a lot more nuance into it than that, but it still sounds like "When the going gets tough, the tough get utilitarian." Brutus picks the choice that's "best for everyone else?" Measured in utils or hedons?

If Brutus was only interested in having the best outcome, there was no need for him to be a conspirator. Caesar ends up dead either way. (This came up at the Resolved: Brutus was an honorable man debate; hat tip Noah.)

Housemate Dara was at that debate and picked up this line of reasoning in her speech: Brutus lending his dagger to the assassination changed the story. It had been about a self-serving power grab; Brutus made it about the Republic. He had more to lose by being involved (personal loyalty to Caesar that none of the other conspirators had), but he was also the only one in a position to make the enterprise ideological and honorable. Sanctification through narrative: it works.

This puts us squarely in the realm of honor (Socrates: "When life gives you hemlock, make hemlockade") rather than pragmatism (Aristotle: "You shall not sin against philosophy twice"), so it doesn't make sense to talk about what's "best for everyone."