"Eubulides" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 9, 2014, at 8:24 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What doesn't make a lot of sense is the repeated insistence of many > > PEN-Lers that > > there is no place for moral/ethical considerations in discussions about > > capitalism etc. > Well, I’m one of those pen-lers who think that morality/ethics is *just* > politics cloaking > itself in an idiom that seeks Finality; the *ipse* *dixit* problem [even > apple mail refuses > to identify those terms!]. So yeah, it does make sense; hence the problem of > skepticism. Moral principles aren't suitable to base a theory of economics. Ayn Randians try to do that with vague concepts of force. And, it looks like liberal economist try so hard to get income and net worth equality, but have no idea what that means except for the extreme case of CEOs. Unfortunately, many people think in terms of an inconsistent morality instead of what is best for society. So, we need to get a consistent theory of morality and create moral principles that are consistent with changing society for the better. The other problem is having ethical principles so that the free exchange of ideas can take place along with union leaders and politicians moving away from corruption. -- Ron
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
