Confronting Our Biases: The Ethical Pendulum as We Approach 2024

In a world overwhelmed by misinformation, I, Jose Franco, have come to realize that the more I read, the less I know. This realization has made me confront the possibility that I might be my own biggest obstacle in learning about the things I may not think I’m bad at. Through visualization exercises, I'm actively working to challenge my biases. As we examine the diverse influences shaping our lives, we witness a pendulum swinging between nihilism, altruism, and objectivity—one that affects every aspect of modern existence.

0 to 14 Pendulum Scale Explanation:

• 0-6: Represents varying degrees of nihilism or self-interest, with motivations rooted in materialism, skepticism of meaning, or personal gain.
• 7: Represents neutrality or objective balance, where decisions and actions align with rational self-interest but also recognize ethical and practical considerations for the broader community.
• 8-14: Represents altruism, where actions are increasingly motivated by collective well-being, empathy, and ethical duty, often going against personal or capitalist gain.

With the 2024 election approaching, it is crucial for Americans to critically assess where their values fall on this spectrum and to engage in the democratic process to shape a future reflective of our collective ethics. The swing of this pendulum is in your hands—register to vote. Throughout history, we see this dance between meaninglessness and selflessness, with objective truth often serving as the fulcrum. This dynamic shapes our politics, philosophy, media, and personal lives. As the author of How To Get Better At Things You Don’t Think You’re Bad At By 2020, I view this pendulum through a lens that combines Herbert Simon’s philosophy of bounded rationality with contemporary events. Understanding this swing is essential as we navigate the rhetoric of political figures like J.D. Vance and Donald Trump, particularly as it unfolds in places like Springfield, Ohio. By grasping this framework, we can objectively encourage voter registration and active engagement in our democracy.

Jose Franco’s breakdown of how key philosophical, political, and economic actors fall on this spectrum sheds light on the tensions at play:

1. Elon Musk’s Behavior and Trump Support

• Nihilism (5): Musk’s erratic behavior and support for Trump reflect a calculated indifference to consequences. His pursuit of deregulation and market dominance places self-interest above collective morality, aligning with capitalism’s inherent contradictions.
• Altruism (4): Though Musk’s ventures in green energy and space exploration appear altruistic, they are ultimately driven by self-interest, diluting their ethical significance.
• Objectivity (7): Musk’s decisions are grounded in rational, technological motivations, but his societal impact leaves ethical questions unanswered.

2. Paul Starr’s Perspective on Media ("The Creation of the Media")

• Nihilism (6): Starr’s critique of media institutions reveals a self-interested manipulation of public opinion, suggesting a nihilistic view of the role media plays in shaping society.
• Altruism (8): However, Starr advocates for reform, aiming to create a more egalitarian and informed media landscape.
• Objectivity (7): His work stands on factual and historical analysis, maintaining a balanced critique while pushing for ethical improvements.

3. Hegel and Schopenhauer's Philosophies

• Hegel:
• Nihilism (5): Hegel’s philosophy of dialectical progress acknowledges struggle but maintains a belief in ultimate freedom and meaning, making it less nihilistic.
• Altruism (9): His emphasis on collective ethical life and mutual recognition points toward altruism, pushing history toward justice.
• Objectivity (7): Hegel’s method is rooted in rationality and the observation of historical movements.
• Schopenhauer:
• Nihilism (9): Schopenhauer’s focus on suffering and the will-to-live leans heavily toward pessimism, rejecting grand moral narratives.
• Altruism (3): While advocating for asceticism, Schopenhauer’s solutions are individualistic and lack broader societal concern.
• Objectivity (7): His philosophy is empirically grounded but reflects a deeply personal view of human suffering.

4. Thomas Piketty and Ha-Joon Chang

• Nihilism (3): Both economists acknowledge systemic inequalities but remain solutions-oriented, rejecting despair.
• Altruism (10): They advocate for wealth redistribution and economic justice, focusing on collective well-being.
• Objectivity (7): Their data-driven approaches present rational, fact-based analyses of inequality.

5. Che Guevara and Thomas Sowell

• Che Guevara:
• Nihilism (7): Guevara’s rejection of capitalism’s moral framework and reliance on violent revolution reflects a pragmatic nihilism toward existing systems.
• Altruism (12): His vision for a classless society, rooted in Marxist ideals, embodies altruism, though his methods were often brutal.
• Objectivity (6): Guevara’s ideas were shaped by real-world inequalities, though heavily ideologically driven.
• Thomas Sowell:
• Nihilism (2): Sowell’s free-market advocacy emphasizes individual responsibility over systemic reform, downplaying collective efforts for social justice.
• Altruism (5): While pragmatic, Sowell’s focus on self-determination lacks a strong commitment to broader altruistic principles.
• Objectivity (7): His economic analyses are grounded in rigorous data, though his ideological biases shape his conclusions.

6. Jose Franco’s 2019 Book ("How To Get Better At Things You Don’t Think You’re Bad At By 2020")

• Nihilism (4): Franco’s philosophy encourages self-improvement and rejecting complacency, without embracing despair.
• Altruism (10): His focus on breaking barriers and fostering empathy speaks to a high level of altruism, especially in addressing systemic inequalities.
• Objectivity (7): Franco balances personal narrative with philosophical reflection, grounded in an objective pursuit of self-betterment.

7. Ukraine War and Geopolitical Context (20 Years Prior)

• Nihilism (8): The Ukraine war reflects disillusionment with global cooperation, power struggles, and nationalism, resonating with a broader sense of nihilism in international relations.
• Altruism (6): Diplomatic and humanitarian efforts to address the conflict highlight the limits of altruism in preventing violence.
• Objectivity (7): An objective analysis of the war must consider macroeconomic and geopolitical forces, though subjective narratives often dominate the discourse.

8. Merchant Kings (Stephan Bown)

• Nihilism (9): The atrocities of corporate colonialism by entities like the Dutch East India Company reflect extreme capitalist nihilism, where profit trumps morality.
• Altruism (3): These companies’ motivations were purely economic, with little concern for the people they exploited, though global trade expanded as a result.
• Objectivity (7): Bown’s account offers a neutral, factual representation of corporate exploitation during the colonial era.

9. Herbert Simon’s Bounded Rationality

• Nihilism (5): Simon's theory recognizes human limitations in decision-making, acknowledging uncertainty and the irrationality within complex systems.
• Altruism (9): However, Simon’s work aims to create frameworks that improve collective decision-making, reflecting altruism in its goal to enhance societal outcomes.
• Objectivity (7): His philosophy is data-driven and focused on optimizing decisions based on realistic cognitive limitations, sitting at the midpoint of objectivity.

10. J.D. Vance, Donald Trump, and Springfield, OH

• Nihilism (6): The rhetoric of both Vance and Trump reflects a rejection of traditional political norms and a chaotic embrace of populism, exploiting fears and anxieties for political gain.
• Altruism (3): Their focus on self-interest and nationalist policies often lacks a commitment to collective well-being, exacerbating societal divides.
• Objectivity (7): While their rhetoric resonates with certain voters, it often distorts facts, calling into question the objectivity of their positions.

By examining these diverse influences, we see the pendulum of nihilism, altruism, and objectivity swinging across every facet of modern life. As the 2024 election approaches, Americans must critically evaluate where their values fall on this spectrum and engage in the democratic process to shape a future that reflects their collective ethics. The swing of this pendulum is in your hands—register to vote.