Why Are We Here?

One of the luxuries of being retired is that I can take time in the morning to read Interesting Things.  Often, I find the interesting by visiting blogs or commentary I've visited in the past and following promising looking links.  If I think the linked post worthwhile, I'll see what else looks promising on the site. 

Today, I ran across Social Matter and found two posts very intriguing.  One argues that political philosophies fundamentally misunderstand the concept of value.  The other argues that modern economic theory inappropriately treats the economy as separate from larger goals of society which the economy should be made to support.  Both posts, although focused on different aspects of economic life, shared a concern for blind pursuit of a strategy without considering whether the strategies support appropriate ends.

The post on value I found particularly helpful.  The author argues logically and consistently in support of a position I have held up to now only based on  inchoate feelings.  The author advances the principal that appropriate limits exist on individual action and that those limits should be established based on whether the limits will increase or decrease value to broader society.   I am not sufficiently conversant with philosophy to know whether the exposition of this particular line of reasoning advances the state of the art (if one can use such terms for philosophy), but as I say it certainly aided my thinking on the matter.  It seems to me, however, that the conclusion is inarguable and, I would posit, is in fact not argued by any political philosophy as actually implemented.  No extant or former polity (as far as I am aware, conceding that my knowledge is limited) permits individual action without any limit.  Even extreme libertarians and anarchists impose some limits.  In fact it makes no sense to speak of a collection of individuals without limits on their actions as a group of any sort.  Yes, I understand that we are talking about philosophy here uncontaminated by reference to the real. So the question is how as a theoretical matter does one support limits on individual behavior.  It seems though that because a political philosophy is meaningless divorced from its effects in the real world those effects are fair game.  (I think of criticisms of Communism or Socialism which are often not theoretical but grounded in the real world effects of implementing that philosophy).

But back to value.  As the author demonstrates limits on individual actions can be justified based on what increases societal good.  Here we hit the wall erected by modern scientific materialism.  We have two choices: either we are created and have a purpose or we are accidental accretions of chemicals without one.  If we assume the former a basis exists for determining what increases societal good--that which assists us with achieving the purpose for which we were created.  If we assume the latter, no basis exists for determining what increases societal good because there is no basis for deciding that one course of action is better than another.

The second article arrives at a similar conclusion: the economy should be considered to be an adjunct to achieving broader societal goals.  It should not be managed as an end in itself without considering its effects on achieving the purpose of society.  Now it happens that the author, using the Greek root of the word economy ( Oikonomia, which he translates as meaning “'order of the household'"), argues that the economy should be managed to the end of guiding "the formation and maintenance of families" a goal I heartily agree with.  But the determination that increasing the formation and maintenance of families is the aim of society depends once again on the assumption that our existence has some meaning or purpose.

All of these discussions, as indeed the discussion of any but the most trivial matters of our lives, leads us back to God--whom no matter how hard we try and no matter how desperately we may want to we cannot avoid and whose overwhelming presence in our lives everyone (even those who most wish to deny his existence and escape his influence) will bend the knee and acknowledge and confess it as the consequence of His perfect love for all of His children.             

My Privilege

Checking your privilege seems to be the latest meme.  It is a question posed, I gather, to white people and appears to me to be an assertion rather than a request to perform any sort of soul searching.  I understand that I am accused of being privileged because of my family background.  That is, because of my ancestors I have had a leg up on other members of society in competing for jobs and material things.  I freely admit that my ancestors by dint of their hard work, dedication to God and their families have bestowed an incalculable benefit on me; I am privileged to be one of their descendants. 

All of my great grandparents immigrated from England, Denmark and Sweden in the 1800's after they joined the LDS Church.  None of them was rich,  They were all of the lower classes in their native countries and all of them made the decision to sell everything they had and travel from their native lands to Deseret which at the time was not part of the United States.  All of my great grandparents traveled a thousand miles across the plains of what is now the Western United States by wagon and by handcart carrying with them only what they could carry and what would fit in a wagon, or in some cases a handcart.  None of them arrived in Deseret with more than a few cents to their name.  When they arrived in the mid 1800's, they found a community barely scratching an existence from the ground in almost desert conditions.  They lived at first in mud huts or holes in the ground until they could build by themselves with some neighborly help more suitable shelter.  Some were sent to outlying areas to colonize.  Those were required to start from scratch yet again after arriving and becoming somewhat established in Salt Lake City.

All of them worked hard and sacrifice for their posterity and taught their children who taught their children who taught me to work hard and sacrifice.  Slowly over the generations their material circumstances improved.  I still recall hearing from a cousin at my Uncle's funeral recalling his father's story about finding my Grandmother prostrate in tears on the floor because there was nothing to eat in the house and she did not know how she was going to feed her family.  But as I say, my family's fortunes improved with time and effort along with those of the rest of the Country.

  So yes I am privileged but not because of the color of my skin, but because of those who went before me and established a legacy of hard work and dedication that has been handed down to me through generations.  I have tried to pass these lessons to my own children and have tried to help others who are not part of my family establish the same traditions in their families so that their children and grandchildren can one day acknowledge the privilege bestowed on them by their ancestors.