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.