Twice, now, within a few weeks, a TV character has driven home the moral of the episode that one shall die for many.
Just the usual thoughtless blithering of approved formulae empty of meaning?
Or will the authorities soon be killing convicts and the homeless to harvest their organs?
The good shepherd of common reference aims at the good of the herd.
The individual sheep count for nothing, already marked for death should that be required for what TV characters have taken to calling, as if in all caps, "the greater good."
It could be argued that rational, selfish sheep would unanimously approve such a regime of official murder, each believing himself more likely to benefit than lose.
The case is different if the losers are always to be chosen from among an expendable minority, and always to benefit those outside it.
Those to benefit would prefer this to a regime of universal risk.
Those among the sacrificial class would object.
As would they all if it occured to the shepherd to sacrifice sheep now alive for future generations of sheep.
The greater good?
Whose good might that be?
Of course, the good shepherd is a myth, as unreal as Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
The real shepherd's concern is not the good of the herd but of the owner of the herd, who might be himself.
The good shepherd's intentions are, at least figuratively, those of a good predator.
He culls the herd to make a better herd - better for himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment