Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Wednesday, July 29. 2015

The Clash of the Three Moralities

In the United States, social debates are really about the clash between custom, creed, and contract:



Custom: “We should do X because our ancestors have always done X.”


Creed: “We should do X because God or the gods commanded us to do X.”


Contract: “We should do X because X is in the self-interest of all of us, when we properly understand our self-interest.”



Posted by Bird Dog in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 18:02 | Comments (4) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

I'll opt for contract almost every time. The first two often precipitate a call for laws. The third still allows for the contract to be broken, but if it is broken, those who are harmed by its breaking have the option to not work with the person who broke it.

Laws don't prevent behaviors. They also frequently harm people they weren't meant to impact.

There are exceptions, of course. Property and life, off the top of my head, are areas where law is essential. But in a sense, these are contract arrangements to begin with. It's in our best interests to not take the lives of others, so most of us avoid engaging damaging behaviors which would harm others. The same is true of property. But it is important to punish people who break those laws.

Laws which are attached to creed and culture are damaging, though. While we can all agree that, culturally, sexual discrimination is wrong, but I've personally seen laws against it used improperly. By the same token laws against creed issues - such as adultery - have failed magnificently.

Sometimes, 'the invisible Hand' just works. Its mystery is part of its effectiveness.
#1 Bulldog on 2015-07-30 09:48 (Reply)
I too would like to return to the year 1905. workplace safety laws, especially in the mines and limiting child labor, interfere with the sacred right to contract for wages, the way God Himself stated when He handed down the Declaration of independence and the King James Version (Authorized) on Mt Sinai.
#2 Donny "The Bear Jew" Donowitz on 2015-07-30 17:26 (Reply)
Back in the day, women worked in mines in Great Britain, often pulling the mine carts. And, sadly but not surprisingly, the more comely women found themselves required to be sexually available to the overseers if they didn't want the carts with square wheels and faulty brakes.

When the women were legislated out of the mines (1847 springs to mind but could be wildly inaccurate), it was for morals reasons, not because the work was too hard.

Reminds me of a union meeting back in the '60s or '70s in the USA. Was a dinner meeting. Male union bosses stood up to boast how they had "helped" women workers by limiting the amount of physical work they had to do, particularly with respect to lifting loads. Woman union rep who was there stood up, stopped the self-congratulations, and had the (female) server deposit her tray in front of the bosses. Then she called for a scale. Tray the server was carrying far exceeded the "humane" limits the male bosses had imposed on female union workers.
#2.1 Frances on 2015-07-30 23:32 (Reply)
Which category gives meaning to concept of "should"--custom, creed, or contract?
#3 Texan99 on 2015-07-30 17:28 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.