All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 7, 2020 - Dennis Prager Show
08:19
Ultimate Issues: Micro vs. Macro Values
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ultimate Issues Hour is the destination.
Maps give you no wisdom.
They give you spectacular knowledge.
Here is exactly where you are, but they don't tell you where you should go.
That's what the Ultimate Issues Hour is about.
The big stuff.
Where to go.
So, everybody, I'm Dennis Prager, and I thank you for being with me.
New York Times had a very, very long article on Prager University and me just on Sunday.
And one of the things that they noted about me was that I have always been preoccupied with great ethical, moral issues and think that it's far more important to raise a good child.
Than a child who gets into a prestigious college.
Or even, you know, a good child rather than a brilliant child.
And yet, I support President Trump.
And how is that possible?
And they say, well, he separates micro and macro values.
And a lot of commenters commented on that in the New York Times.
What kind of guy am I? Is this Prager?
And here, I'll give you one example in a comment.
I thought Prager considered moral values, marital fidelity, religiosity, respect, honesty, and the like, to microvalues.
Considered moral values, I don't know what the two is for, microvalues, and as important as macrovalues, whatever that means.
Seems as though he is speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
Alright, so that was a comment on me in the New York Times.
So I decided, maybe I'll explain.
This will help a great deal in understanding the complex question of how do you assess a human being, morally speaking.
We are almost two separate beings, we humans.
Our micro and our macro selves are not the same.
Ideally, and this is important, ideally both are good.
We have good micro values, that is how we treat people in our daily life, and we have good macro values, the values for society.
That we have good in both.
Very often, people have not had both.
There were people in the South who supported slavery, who were honest and decent and generous and kind in their daily life.
Alright, there's an example of a bifurcation between macro value and micro value.
There were people who wanted to get rid of slavery.
They had a great macro value.
And they were awful toward the humans in their lives.
They had terrible micro values.
I don't know why this is so...
Well, I do know why it's complex.
It's complex because people don't learn any wisdom anymore.
They learn specialized knowledge.
They don't even get much knowledge anymore.
They get knowledge in one arena.
The arena that they specialize in.
But this is just common sense, what I said.
I learned it because I went to religious school, but it is also common sense.
There's just a difference.
When it comes to the president, it's a good example.
Now, I'm not of the school that he is terrible in his micro-life, but obviously quite flawed.
Not even quite.
Obviously flawed.
Right?
We understand that.
He has sinned in his micro life.
But his macro values seem to be superb to me.
Now, people who hate him think his micro and his macro are awful.
Okay, that's fine.
I'm not here to defend the president.
I do that other hours.
I am here to make clear how we assess ourselves and others In the moral sphere.
That's all.
So to me, a president's macro values are way more important than his micro values.
Because he gets to put into effect his macro values.
Most of us don't.
I do because I have a fairly large constituency.
So my macro values matter, not as much as a president's, but they matter because I affect others in the macro, not just in the micro.
How I treat my wife, how I treat my friends, how I treat my business associates, how I treat a waitress.
Okay, those are all the micro arena.
Most people do not have a place to express their macro values, or at least, well, they have a place, the voting booth, social media, micro...
Most people today, unlike the past, really do have a vehicle for macro values.
But of course, not like a president.
Therefore, in assessing a president, I am infinitely more interested in his macro values than micro values.
Correct?
That is what...
People reading the New York Times piece on me and Prager, you did not pick up.
And I don't blame the writer, because as it is, it was a very long piece.
They're not going to explain all of my views.
I understand that.
But I read to you a typical comment.
I thought Prager considered moral values...
Like microvalues, as important as macrovalues, whatever that means, seems as though he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
Obviously, this person doesn't understand what I mean.
I'm not blaming them.
I'm just stating it as a fact.
They don't understand.
But it doesn't take long to explain, right?
I mentioned this in passing.
I mentioned a few times that I'm just finishing this very long book.
About the man who was most responsible for giving the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union, to Stalin.
Klaus Fuchs, a German scientist who left Germany when Hitler came to power.
He was the second leading scientist.
He was indispensable to the creation of the atom bomb in England and America.
Indispensable.
He's a brilliant, brilliant scientist.
And in the very beginning of the book, in passing, the author writes about how decent a human being he was.
And I have no doubt about it.
He was loyal to friends.
He was not a mean person.
He was extremely responsible.
He was not lazy.
He worked hard.
Whatever trait you want.
But...
His macro values were awful.
He believed in communism.
▲
Export Selection