The virtue of self-preservation
![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
As Oryx noted, that Slytherin self-preservation, so maligned by the Gryffindorian point of view, can indeed be a virtue. At its simplest, it simply means avoiding foolish risks, reckoning that one is more good alive than dead. Hell, even Dumbles said that in his callous remark to a grieving Severus wishing he were dead: "And what use would that be to anyone?" Apparently that was all the worth he saw in Severus (or in anyone, to be honest): What "use" he would be as a means to an end. Screw Kant's categorical imperative, to "treat people as ends in themselves, not merely as means to an end."
At its worst, of course, the instinct for self-preservation becomes Winston Smith's (1984) cry of, "Do it to Julia! Not to me! To Julia!" It preserves self at the expense of others, and will sacrifice anyone if so doing will preserve the self.
At its best, the trait of self-preservation is not only personally pragmatic but ethically virtuous: A mature sense of self-preservation extends beyond the self to include other "selves," i.e., to see oneself and others as ends in themselves, not merely as means to ends. It rejects the ideology of sacrifice altogether, casts aside lifeboat ethics and the notion of life as a zero-sum game in which someone has to sacrifice in order for another to gain, and strives to save EVERYONE, to the greatest extent possible.
The idealization of sacrifice, on the other hand, can be seen as unethical in the way that it sees the sacrifice of self and/or others as "justified" because it serves a desired end. Even if that end is (purportedly) The Greater Good, should individual human worth really be reduced to what "use" someone's life or death may be to acheiving an end?
Considering that the Slytherins are billed by the (Gryffindorian) Hat as "using any means to achieve their ends," it really makes me wonder how much of the Gryffindorian perspective through which we view the series can be taken at face value. As we have seen with Severus Snape, the "self-preserving" instinct can (and, certainly in his case, does) lead to the valuation of the intrinsic worth of human life at large. It is Dumbledore who takes the view of shuffling people about as means to an end--and, as Severus bitterly points out, views Harry as a "pig for the slaughter" because that slaughter will serve a Greater End.
Other Slytherin traits can likewise be seen as virtues or vices: ambition, cleverness, cunning, and so on. It's all in the spin, and in the application.
At its worst, of course, the instinct for self-preservation becomes Winston Smith's (1984) cry of, "Do it to Julia! Not to me! To Julia!" It preserves self at the expense of others, and will sacrifice anyone if so doing will preserve the self.
At its best, the trait of self-preservation is not only personally pragmatic but ethically virtuous: A mature sense of self-preservation extends beyond the self to include other "selves," i.e., to see oneself and others as ends in themselves, not merely as means to ends. It rejects the ideology of sacrifice altogether, casts aside lifeboat ethics and the notion of life as a zero-sum game in which someone has to sacrifice in order for another to gain, and strives to save EVERYONE, to the greatest extent possible.
The idealization of sacrifice, on the other hand, can be seen as unethical in the way that it sees the sacrifice of self and/or others as "justified" because it serves a desired end. Even if that end is (purportedly) The Greater Good, should individual human worth really be reduced to what "use" someone's life or death may be to acheiving an end?
Considering that the Slytherins are billed by the (Gryffindorian) Hat as "using any means to achieve their ends," it really makes me wonder how much of the Gryffindorian perspective through which we view the series can be taken at face value. As we have seen with Severus Snape, the "self-preserving" instinct can (and, certainly in his case, does) lead to the valuation of the intrinsic worth of human life at large. It is Dumbledore who takes the view of shuffling people about as means to an end--and, as Severus bitterly points out, views Harry as a "pig for the slaughter" because that slaughter will serve a Greater End.
Other Slytherin traits can likewise be seen as virtues or vices: ambition, cleverness, cunning, and so on. It's all in the spin, and in the application.