Q&A: Is There Choice in Applying a Value
Is There Choice in Applying a Value
Question
I happened to see a video of Leibowitz in which he explains the categorical difference between decisions and conclusions.
One of the examples he gives there is of a judge in a divorce proceeding who has to decide whether the child will stay with the mother or the father. Suppose the judge knows exactly what the child’s situation will be with each parent, and suppose the judge has decided that he wants to rule purely in the child’s best interest. The judge’s dilemma is whether to rule that the child should live in a home with more warmth (the mother) or with greater material well-being (the father). Leibowitz argues there that this is a decision that is not subject to the facts of how one should rule for the “good of the child.”
What do you think in this context?
Seemingly, the judge perceives the Platonic idea of the “good” and acts accordingly; that is, there is no decision here but rather a conclusion, in Leibowitz’s terms.
In another situation, when a person is in conflict between values and acts according to the value that is higher in his eyes, is that a choice? Seemingly, it is forced on him by his scale of values. Can there be a choice between two values, or does choice apply only between a value and an interest (weakness of will)?
Answer
Your question is not really connected to Leibowitz. You are basically asking, according to my view, why there is choice with regard to values if I am only applying what I perceive. And my answer is that indeed there is no choice in values. The choice is whether to obey them and act accordingly. Sometimes this is expressed in your refusing to see the idea of the good and forcing an interpretation of it that suits you. But essentially that is the same thing as choosing not to obey.