Well, assuming that some measure of autonomy is a factor in human interactions, we have some control here.
But my point revolves around the extent to which as dasein there may well be any number of variables embedded in our past that clearly circumscribe [or situate] this control.
The part pertaining to historical and cultural junctures, the part pertaining to the actual sequence of experiences and relationships and points of view that we come to embody over the decades. The part entangled in nature and libido and instinct and id. That part entangled in the subconscious and the unconscious mind.
Now, with respect to the world of either/or, that matters considerably less, doesn’t it? But with respect to the world of is/ought, [as this is then manifested in the interaction of dasein, conflicting goods and political economy] we’ll just have to agree to disagree about our level of control here.
Yeah, the Nazis want to inflict their world view on me and I want to inflict my world view on them. If they succeed then I’m a slave or dead or I have to accept their view and live within it.
Yes, but the Nazis reject democracy [moderation, negotiation, compromise] precisely because as moral and political objectivists they have come [historically] to embody right makes might.
As such, they are able to rationalize total control over the citizenry. And that [of course] included convincing enough of them to go along with the building of concentration and extermination camps.
Now, to the extent that God and religion played a factor here, that’s still being debated. But then it can be argued [perhaps] that fascism is a kind of religion. That way they can justify what they do without having to crudely fall back on might makes right instead.
How does God and religion play a part for them “out in the world” of competing wants and needs? Of competing means and ends?
What does it mean to encompass a particular moral agenda here regarding an issue like abortion? Such that one is convinced that The Right Thing To Do is within reach, and one believes that God and religion are a factor in this.
Sure, God and religion are the authority that can be used to prop up wants and needs.
Are they your own wants and needs or have they been “given” to you by some overlord? You gotta know yourself.
Again, you make the assumption that any particular individual can get to the bottom of this by coming up with a frame of mind that somehow transcends [obviates] the manner in which I contrue the role that dasein, conflicting goods and political economy play here.
I think you can know yourself at least well enough to get rid of some biases.
Okay, with respect to your own value judgments as they pertain to a moral conflict we will all likely be familiar with, what particular biases have you gotten rid of?
And what happens when how you know yourself here becomes entangled in important new experiences, relationships, sources of knowledge/information. Won’t you basically just rationalize any change of mind by assuming it is necessarily an “improvement” on what you once believed before?
With so much at stake – immortality, salvation, divine justice – how could a loving, just and merciful God really leave any room for doubt?
You can’t escape your Protestant Christian roots.
How is this then an adequate response to the point I raise?