Numbers and Morals
We learn that any argument is stronger by numbers than without the numbers. If the numbers and percentages are inappropriate, we are automatically reacting against the causes, and if it is not, we wait for the time that it is. Dose we make a correct choice when our decision affected by numbers that come from market and economics researches. Are we free to choose what is right? Dose market brings to us freedom as the Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher believe “that markets, not government, held the key to prosperity and freedom?”(Sandel 6) Are we supposed to consider moral values in our market solutions or not? It is undeniable the power of the numbers. Currently, numbers explain everything and it is handiest tools that humans have invited so far. We can see that every advanced civilization have been powered by advance numbers system by tracking the number's history. Moreover, it penetrates in every decision that human makes; about every aspect of life such as science, economy, business, health, etc. However, sometimes we forget that the numbers only explain the situation. They do not show the decisions we must make. Make a decision is not only based on marketing gains and losses. Sometimes it works, but there are moments that making decision based on numbers are not the best choices. According to Sandel “we have to decide how to value the goods in question—health, education, family, life, nature, art, civic duties, and so on. These are moral and political questions, not merely economic ones. To resolve them, we have to debate, case by case, the moral meaning of these goods and the proper way of valuing them.”(Sandel 10) For example, when it comes to make a decision about health problems, most people do not like...
... middle of paper ...
...es which is a powerful and an effective tool. But it is delusion if we think we can solve every problem based on market values. We all feel well when we see the movies heroes’ actions motive are based on right and wrong and moral judgments in any costs even their life. We feel relief and safe because we are imagining in crises situation our life are not depends on economic gains and losses. We feel that we belong to a moral society that everyone cares about others based on moral values. Nevertheless, we expected the same from our government.
Works Cited
Sandel, Michael. What money can’t buy. Penguin, 2012. Print.
Public Finance Balance of Smoking in the Czech Republic. Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights website. Web. 28, November, 2000.
Economic Facts about U.S. Tobacco Production and Use. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. Web. 6, February, 2014
Renneboog, R. M. (2016). Cigarette Smoking Bans: An Overview. Canadian Points Of View: Cigarette Smoking Bans, 1.
According to Karl Polanyi, a market is a meeting place for the purpose of exchange and transaction (Polanyi 1957, 56). The prompt states that a standard view of market holds that most or all values are external to the logic of self-interested, mutually beneficial exchange. Karl Polanyi and Friedrich Hayek analyze this view of market in their writings and evaluate it according to their own beliefs. Hayek seems to agree with the standard view. He believes that values like the concern for justice or the minimizing of people suffering are not embedded in the market, but are external from it. He supports this view by introducing the concept of what he calls “catallaxy.” Polanyi, however, takes an opposing view to externalized values by saying that values are, in fact, embedded in the market. He presents an overview of how history supports this view.
The author of the article believes that through the social and productive cooperation, the society can reach its wealth and prosperity. The production cooperation has two main elements, freedom and good health. However, the author emphasizes that freedom is more important than good health and wealth as well. He points out that "the sick people can be productive, but without freedom the productive cooperation of the marketplace is impossible." He also clarified that the rich people could not enjoy their wealth without freedom. Moreover, Professor Dwight mentions that there is mutual dependence among the production and freedom. He clarified this idea in two points. First, "Markets requires freedom". The author attacks the centralized government that prevents the freedom and dominates the information flows, which is an important element of the market economy. Second, "freedom requires markets". Professor Lee emphasizes that privatization protects individual freedom. In this context he mentions for an important example that we might experience in everyday life, "the pollution problems." These are real problems in our world today, especially in the over populated cities and countries such as Mexico City and Cairo.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2013). Healthy people 2020 topics & objectives: Tobacco use. Viewed at http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/TopicsObjectives2020/ObjectivesList.aspx?topicid=41#286842 .
Throughout history the world has experienced several types of socio-economies, from Mussolini’s fascism to Mao’s communism. All of those economies have its weaknesses and strengths and most have countries that can validate its effectiveness. However, to decide which economy is truly better for society, there has to be criteria on which to judge the economy’s effectiveness. So what is a society? In essence, it is a network of bonds we as human beings forged under the assumption, that working together we can all be happier than if we were only looking out for ourselves. With society, everyone is able to concentrate on what they do best, reap the benefits from the skills of others, and avoid the conflict that would arise otherwise. Thus, it follows that the ultimate goal of society is the happiness of everyone. And currently, there is only one economy that has staved off the test of time and reached that goal. Capitalism, with its merit system, flexible cost adjustments, and by having no other economic contenders is able to achieve a better society than any other socio-economic system can.
Many traditions and values of the American society are beneficial, but some are harmful. Acceptance of utilitarianism will preserve beneficial traditions while replacing the harmful ones. As a result, new traditions, grounded in reason, will emerge, and future generations may wonder how the irrational and unnatural non-utilitarian values had survived for so long.
Imagine a child living in a hot, government owned apartment in Chicago. He has no father. With his single, jobless mother he struggles to the words of the founding fathers: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable Rights; that among these, are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...” (The Declaration of Independence). This is one of the most famous phrases in the US Declaration of Independence and has become the underpinning of the dreams of millions of people around the world. Although the words are different, these sentiments are reflected in the political and economical policies of many democracies. While the notion of ‘happiness for all’ seems like the obvious solution to many of our persistent problems, we inevitably encounter conflicts between our actions and our morals. “The state is based on……the contradiction between public and private life, between universal and particular interests. For this reason, the state must confine itself to formal, negative activities.”(Marx, 1992). This essay focuses on the issues of a prominent theory, Utilitarianism as it blends and encompasses both areas of Economics and Ethics which have become the basis of our governmental bodies.
Tuttle, Bill. "Types of Tobacco." Types of Tobacco. Oral Cancer Foundation Inc., Sept. 2010. Web. 19 Nov. 2013
James Rachels' article, "Morality is Not Relative," is incorrect, he provides arguments that cannot logically be applied or have no bearing on the statement of contention. His argument, seems to favor some of the ideas set forth in cultural relativism, but he has issues with other parts that make cultural relativism what it is.
We have our own moral codes but our decisions are solely based on the impact of our perspective on the people’s welfare and happiness. Although it is in our perspective as utilitarian to decide what actions to make, the theory of utilitarianism has strengths and weaknesses.
Therefore a free market is not desirable as maximizing their utility is priority. So government is expected to correct the market failure by choosing to char...
Over time, the actions of mankind have been the victim of two vague labels, right and wrong. The criteria for these labels are not clearly defined, but they still seem to be the standard by which the actions of man are judged. There are some people that abide by a deontological view when it comes to judging the nature of actions; the deontological view holds that it is a person's intention that makes an action right or wrong. On the other hand there is the teleological view which holds that it is the result of an action is what makes that act right or wrong. In this essay I will be dealing with utilitarianism, a philosophical principle that holds a teleological view when it comes the nature of actions. To solely discuss utilitarianism is much too broad of topic and must be broken down, so I will discuss specifically quantitative utilitarianism as presented by Jeremy Bentham. In this essay I will present the argument of Bentham supporting his respective form of utilitarianism and I will give my critique of this argument along the way.
Today, more than ever, there is great debate over politics and which economic system works the best. How needs and wants should be allocated, and who should do the allocating, is one of the most highly debated topics in our current society. Be it communist dictators defending a command economy, free market conservatives defending a market economy, or European liberals defending socialism, everyone has an opinion. While all systems have flaws and merits, it must be decided which system is the best for all citizens. When looking at both the financial well being of all citizens, it is clear that market economies fall short on ensuring that the basic needs of all citizens are met. If one looks at liberty and individual freedom, it is evident that command economies tend to oppress their citizens. Therefore, socialism, which allows for basic needs to be met and personal freedoms to be upheld, is the best economic system for all of a country’s citizens.
Although it is beneficial for the economy for the production of tobacco products it is extremely risky to use the product. According to researchers second-hand smoke is terrible for everyone in the world who walk by someone who is exhaling. In the article by Robert Proctor “Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition” he states that cigarettes are the “most deadl...
"State of Tobacco Control 2013." State of Tobacco Control® 2013. American Lung Association, n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2013.