DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Milty's Mag, March 1942

Transcribe
Translate

Milty's Mag, March 1942

Page 6

down to whether or not your superman would be human in emotional outlook or non-human." I do not know what the human outlook is. The question is: will the superman believe in acting precisely in accordance with his logical conclusions, or will he hold reservations? If, after evaluating a situation and finding that it is necessary to kill a person, will he then go ahead and do the job, or will he succumb to the illogical belief that it is wrong to kill a person even though logic inexorably demands it?

If our superman is indeed logical, he will hold no illogical, emotional beliefs. That is not to say that he will have no emotions. He will be able to experience happiness, liking, hate, etc etc, but he will know why he has those experiences, and he will be able to eliminate those which are advserse in value. Gilbert mentions "emotion" as being deep-rooted and basic. I don't know whether it is or is not. In fact, I don't quite know just what "emotion" is. I do know that an emotion is a response to a certain stimulus, and I am told that it is a learned reaction. Whether or not the superman possessed a certain emotional reaction to a given stimulus would depend upon how he was brought up. There is nothing basic about it, and nothing to be affected genetically by a mutation. That is why, as I mentioned, I failed to understand Jommy Cross's emotion about killing people. The only answer I can see is in the suggestion I made that in the superman certain traits may be inheritable which in us are not inheritable. 

I suppose it is necessary for me to support my statement that an adversity to killing people is illogical. Without going into metaphysical considerations of "right" and "wrong", I might argue on the point any such generalization is illogical because it does not consider the factors of the individual problem. A logical person is less prone to rely upon preconceptions. The illogical person says: "I like this kind of thing and I dislike that kind of thing; everytime I meet that kind of thing in the future I shall dislike it." The logical person makes no such generalization, or if he does, he holds it very loosely. He prefers to look at every individual thing and say: "What is this thing, for what reasons should I dislike it and for what reasons should I like it?" It is more work, but safer in the long run.

Therefore: If our superman is a logical person, and if he decides that his evaluation of the situation makes it necessary to kill a person, and if it is his ethics always to do that which is necessary, then he will have no compunctions about killing a person.

The subject of doing that which is necessary is an interesting and a complicated one. While that system of action may be too strict for a time when the world is less intense than it is now, it is the only practical way for a practical person to live in a world of conflict. The Lieutenant, in Final Blackout, is the ultimate example of this idea. .... Final Blackout was not a very fantastic story. I have a peculiar feeling that we had better practice being Lieutenants. ...... So this is my last stencil.

Saving...

down to whether or not your superman would be human in emotional outlook or non-human." I do not know what the human outlook is. The question is: will the superman believe in acting precisely in accordance with his logical conclusions, or will he hold reservations? If, after evaluating a situation and finding that it is necessary to kill a person, will he then go ahead and do the job, or will he succumb to the illogical belief that it is wrong to kill a person even though logic inexorably demands it? If our superman is indeed logical, he will hold no illogical, emotional beliefs. That is not to say that he will have no emotions. He will be able to experience happiness, liking, hate, etc etc, but he will know why he has those experiences, and he will be able to eliminate those which are advserse in value. Gilbert mentions "emotion" as being deep-rooted and basic. I don't know whether it is or is not. In fact, I don't quite know just what "emotion" is. I do know that an emotion is a response to a certain stimulus, and I am told that it is a learned reaction. Whether or not the superman possessed a certain emotional reaction to a given stimulus would depend upon how he was brought up. There is nothing basic about it, and nothing to be affected genetically by a mutation. That is why, as I mentioned, I failed to understand Jommy Cross's emotion about killing people. The only answer I can see is in the suggestion I made that in the superman certain traits may be inheritable which in us are not inheritable. I suppose it is necessary for me to support my statement that an adversity to killing people is illogical. Without going into metaphysical considerations of "right" and "wrong", I might argue on the point any such generalization is illogical because it does not consider the factors of the individual problem. A logical person is less prone to rely upon preconceptions. The illogical person says: "I like this kind of thing and I dislike that kind of thing; everytime I meet that kind of thing in the future I shall dislike it." The logical person makes no such generalization, or if he does, he holds it very loosely. He prefers to look at every individual thing and say: "What is this thing, for what reasons should I dislike it and for what reasons should I like it?" It is more work, but safer in the long run. Therefore: If our superman is a logical person, and if he decides that his evaluation of the situation makes it necessary to kill a person, and if it is his ethics always to do that which is necessary, then he will have no compunctions about killing a person. The subject of doing that which is necessary is an interesting and a complicated one. While that system of action may be too strict for a time when the world is less intense than it is now, it is the only practical way for a practical person to live in a world of conflict. The Lieutenant, in Final Blackout, is the ultimate example of this idea. .... Final Blackout was not a very fantastic story. I have a peculiar feeling that we had better practice being Lieutenants. ...... So this is my last stencil.