If intelligence were to be defined as the ability to think, reason and analyze, I believe it would be safer to depend on it than any other factor. Why would anyone think it is dangerous to trust only intelligence? Is it because thinking, reasoning and analysis alone are insufficient for us to make safe decisions? What other components do we need then? Perhaps morals and experience count for as much. However, if I were to place a bet on safe decision, I would rather put my trust on intelligence more than any other factor.
First of all, no one trusts stupidity, no matter how compelling the reasons might be. A stupid decision, be it morally right or by someone with great experience is quick to be condemned. For example, sentencing to death drug traffickers who did not commit violent crimes may seem a bit harsh to some, but in a busy port like Hong Kong, where large volumes of goods move in and out of the country, such a severe penalty acts as a effective deterrent that prevents the island from turning into a drug trading centre. Such is an illustration of applying an intelligent solution to an ethically grey legislation.
Secondly, if a person were to base his decisions on anything other than intelligence, wouldn’t that be even more dangerous? Imagine someone who makes important choices based on gut feeling, self-righteousness and faulty intelligence. Sounds familiar? If the former US president had relied only on intelligence and intelligence alone, he would’ve realized that invading Iraq was a low priority when compared to tearing down Al-Qaeda and capturing Osama bin laden – someone who did base his decisions on intelligence.
Thirdly, you need to ask the question of just how dangerous it can be if you only trusted intelligence. Sure, the world might become colder, more pragmatic and more predictable, but it would definitely not be anymore dangerous than it is now. None of the man-made problems are due to intelligence; in fact a majority of them are due to ignorance, self-interest, avarice and fanaticism - ignorance being the worse of them all.
However, morals and ethics do come into play right after intelligence. Humans are creatures of emotions, and we make plenty of choices based on personal preferences and feelings. Even our concepts of right or wrong are largely based on societal opinions rather than facts. For example, it makes logical sense for the Hong Kong government to pay its ministers salaries commensurate with what they would have earned in the private sector. However, those numbers are considered astronomical compared to the wages of the average Hong Kong worker. Paradoxically, the most logical decision by the government is perceived as rather unreasonable by the majority of working class Hong Kongers. It is therefore impossible for the policy makers to make a ‘right’ decision without considering other factors other than intelligence.
In most cases however, it is ignorance and disregard for intelligence that makes the world a dangerous place, not the other way round. Populist leaders love to espouse lofty ideals and make unrealistic promises, but often fail to achieve them in office. From historical lessons, we’ve learnt that pragmatism has always triumphed over idealism in all cases. A great contrast would be the open door policy of Deng Xiao Ping versus the Great Leap Forward of Mao Zedong in China. One led to unprecedented prosperity, the other lead to the worse famine in history; the former was based solely on intelligence and pragmatism, while the latter based on nothing but communist ideals.
In conclusion, although intelligence alone should not be the only factor in all major decisions, it should be the main one. Other factors such as morals and ideals should come only after that. Any decision, for it to be safe, has to be an intelligent one.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
