ABSTRACT
The interpretation of Spinoza that we have arrived at so far holds that our moral self-understanding – the way we know ourselves and value ourselves – is built around the image of an exemplar. Inevitably, we are prone to finding exemplars in those we observe around us. Zagzebski describes some contemporary scientific studies that support a similar idea:
A new series of studies by Laura E. R. Blackie et al. (forthcoming) […] propose[s] that people obtain their moral grounding and life guidance from paragons who exemplify how to be a good person. In their first study they identified cultural paragons in American society, which included inventors, actors, entrepreneurs, social activists, and fictional characters. In the second study they found that individuals felt virtuous and authentic when they acted like their personally chosen paragons. A third study supported their hypothesis that there was a causal relationship between paragon emulation and moral self-regard. 1
But we have seen how conflict is nearly certain to arise when we live alongside a paragon – an exemplar – who possesses a good that only one person can possess. The identity felt between exemplar and emulator is then corrupted into a conflict between possessor and coveter. Coming to envy and hate the paragon who grounds our moral self-regard leads to a desperate confusion. The exemplar who was meant to answer our fundamental moral question – who should I be? – brings chaos and conflict instead of an answer.