On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Nick Arnett wrote:

> Jesus, Buddha, Mother Theresa, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Oscar
> Romero... there is a long list of virtuous people who did not receive
> material wealth as a consequence.  Arguing that virtuous behavior produces
> material wealth and power is ridiculous, to be blunt.  Some virtuous
people
> have been wealthy; many materially impoverished people have been virtuous.
> The only cause and effect between material wealth and virtue taught by the
> collected wisdom of the ages is that wealth can become an obstacle to
> virtue.  It is very easy, many religions warn us, to fall in love with
> things and as a result, fail to love one's neighbors and God.

I thought that Gautam's point was the virtuous government -- that is,
government that promotes liberty, equality, free speech, and so on -- is
one of the direct causes of a wealthy society because it enables people
to live up to their full potential.  NOT that virtuous individuals are
more likely to be wealthy than unvirtuous individuals.  In other words,
Nick, governments that endorse the liberal humanist values that you and
I espouse are more likely to govern wealthy societies than governments
that enforce tyrranical, straitened interpretations of one religious dogma
or another.

It's an entirely different issue from the question of whether a rich man
can expect to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Marvin Long

Me:
This is precisely my point, and I thank you for stating it so concisely,
Marvin.  I would go a little farther, though.  Virtues produce wealth for
individuals as well - working hard, delaying gratification,
self-discipline - all of these are virtues and virtuous behavior, and, on
the whole, those people who display them are well off, and those who do not
are not.  Virtue, it is often said, is its own reward.  Well, I hope so.
The rewards of vice are more readily immediately, however, which is what
makes being virtuous _difficult_.  Self-indulgence is easier than
self-denial, but self-denial is more virtuous and, in the long run, more
rewarding as well, both for states and for individuals.

Gautam

Reply via email to