‘This place would fall apart without me.’ Is that so? ‘Yes, were it not for my efforts, it would have already collapsed.’ So it teeters on the brink–is that it? ‘Not so long as I keep intervening. It’s a question of constant vigilance.’ Oh? Then suppose you were to let it go for a day. ‘Just walk away?’ No, just step to the side. ‘And?’ And observe what goes on. ‘What are you getting at?’ Only the barest of things: its perdurance and your extinction.
Recall that I have just begun to call into question one of the reigning theses of our modern moral metaphysic. This is that the world, being broken, is in need of fixing. In the last post, I spoke of those who work (as it were) on the front end, believing that the world’s being broken means that anything could potentially go wrong. I then inquired into the kinds of dispositions that would be evident in the kinds of persons who believe this to be the case. Two important dispositions are those of the vigilant person–someone who is always on the lookout for what bad thing may occur–and the worrisome person.
Below, I discuss the connection between worry and the prospect of things potentially going wrong.