Is this consistant with the ethics of the right or the ethics of the left?


With their packs full, their canteens overflowing and their reserve bottles filled to the brim, outdoorsy Arizonans set out on foot this time of year under the scorching sun. But as they navigate the state’s picturesque trails, they face not only physical challenges but ethical ones, like how much water to share with strangers who have miles to go and not a drop to drink.

“If it came down to having enough for myself or helping someone, I’d have to drink my own water,” said Laura Craig.

More Here

Advertisements
Categories: Ethics and Morality | Tags: , , , | 5 Comments

Post navigation

5 thoughts on “Is this consistant with the ethics of the right or the ethics of the left?

  1. BB-Idaho

    Consistent with the ethics of left or right?
    …probably more consistent withMandeville\’s Paradox

  2. The Griper

    had to do aa little research on that paradox, BB.

    based on this man’s interpretation of it i can only say;
    “The paradox is that private vice–greed, pride, envy–can be turned into a public benefit–economic prosperity–in a commercial society.”

    to me this is just a version of the principle of “the end justifies the means”

    with the following depicted as the solution to the paradox;
    “Mandeville does not try to relieve the tension in this paradox, nor reconcile the conflicting components, but instead makes the argument for why economic prosperity should be sacrificed in favor of individual virtue. “

  3. BB-Idaho

    Mandeville was precursor/contemporary of Hume and Adam Smith. His ‘paradox’ was not looked on kindly at the time (although one might extrapolate it through the years
    to Ayn Rand’s ‘Virtue of Selfishness. A good summation is: “Mandeville’s idea that the pursuit of self-interest, when properly managed, can have good consequences, and his insights into the way in which vanity makes people conform to social norms were put to good use by the principal philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment, David Hume and Adam Smith. Moreover, the tension Mandeville exposed between the standards of Christian virtue and the beneficial outcomes due to the pursuit of self-interest provided an impetus to develop a new moral idiom that could accord some value to the tamed forms of self-interest that have beneficial consequences. But old habits of moral thought die hard, and it is still good to have Dr Mandeville’s prescription at hand to deal with rigoristic pundits.” Wherein the key words may be ‘when properly managed’. IMO,
    the paradox may hold sometimes and other times not…so it may not be a paradox at all.
    But then, like the end of the above quote…I am not a ‘rigoristic pundit’. 🙂

  4. The Griper

    ahhh ty, BB. your explanation says a lot. now i can understand why you see that paradox as fitting for this post. i am sure glad to have you as a regular, my friend. your imput always seem to add value to my posts.

  5. The Griper

    BB,
    The explanation of my post is in the debt crisis as well as the recession. It appears that the solution to it has similar consequences as the problem posed here. Regardless of the solution one is to apply, someone will have to pay the consequences and the consequences may appear to have similar effects or argued that way.

Be respecful or your comment will be deleted. Also know that Alinsky tactics do not phase me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: