moral deliberation and crisis of capitalism
The economic situation has exposed our inability to make values \u200b\u200band our commitment to produce a negative value. The recasting moral demand system change
widespread attitudes SANTIAGO Eguidazu
All claims a face fault. And also an atonement. In these pages, Antón Costas said in a superb article, moral bankruptcy of the market economy (El Pais, April 18), which until that society does not express outrage against financial capitalism, and politics does not regain its autonomy address this, it may not be a solution to the crisis, which has come from a moral reestablishment of market economy. The following comments are intended to show that moral bankruptcy rightly predicated of our society and economic system that sustains it, and the subsequent destruction securities that feedback, have necessarily had to come from a collapse of our deliberative capacity and quality. In antiquity, moral deliberation was considered essential to guide action, and the lack of it was described as reckless. The wise man was, indeed, able to discuss the trial with righteousness, equity, critical intelligence and practical knowledge. Prudence well understood is inseparable from action.
is common to recognize that learning from mistakes. But another thing is the failure
values \u200b\u200bare not born or die, they are not objective realities or exist solely in our minds, values \u200b\u200bare built through individual deliberative processes (that is, with oneself) or groups (one with other or even all, all). The man, through the interaction of deliberation and action, carried values. This is how moral progress materially and ultimately society. The crisis has exposed our inability to make values \u200b\u200band our commitment to produce a negative value. And it comes shaping, long in the West, at least three factors that have exploded in the water line of our moral principles. The first is the confusion of wisdom and science. Academic economists, bankers, rating agencies, governments themselves and consumers in general have accepted more or less interested, as "scientific" knowledge that guides and determines its behavior, decision models and economic-financial performance that were brewing since the middle of last century, and whose nucleus can be summarized, oversimplifying, the assumption of a rational maximizing agents of perfect efficiency in resource allocation by markets, the technical possibility of uncorrelated returns and risk, and financial superiority of debt in wealth creation . Aristotle was the first great promoter of prudence as an instrument of reflection for action, which categorically ruled mating with their own apodictic knowledge of wisdom and science. The latter deal is necessary, whereas prudence, deliberation, deal with the contingent. By elevating the status of science models that work in the world of the contingent, the man of today has shed has been left to deliberate and take comfort from what the models predict. And to escape from a basic principle of critical discussion, namely, to assume ultimate responsibility for the actions, putting it in the hands of artificial models, little has cost lasts forever discard the obligation to object or exclude those practices or conflicting actions our values. This Thus, we have caused to all a huge ball of fire that has swept away much of what has been built for decades. And I say to all because, although in very different degrees, is irresponsible and unwise that turns to a loan for the sole purpose of profiting, but also accepts it knowing that it may not return. And here I disagree with those who point solely responsible for the morass as the representatives of the financial arrangements reviled. The financial world is certainly a decisive moral responsibility, absolute end to what has happened, but that does not mean that many who have been driven by the mirage of easy money, who have agreed to ride the wave watching away and not saying a peep, not have to take yours. In a truly ethical atonement about not exempt from responsibility to the rest, but rather the contrary, claims that vise offer the perfect alibi for the man away to disengage from their own moral responsibility.
A second reason that has overshadowed the practice of critical discussion in recent years has been the moral conformity or comfort. In any process of deliberation, there are two parts, one another emotionally and intellectually. John Dewey called the first "value" and the second "valuation." Rate is what we intuitively perceive a state of things urges us to action. Emotions habits, customs generate a first reaction, an immediate proposal for our action. But if you do not involve the rational part of our brain, the process remains incomplete, there is no proper valuation and, consequently, no action is prudent. Thinking has become painful, possibly dangerous, in the days we live, ponder, imagine courses of action, evaluate alternatives, anticipate consequences and to take initiatives is to match the times, is less expensive and risky to keep wheel. The usual attitude of people today is that of a stowaway (free-rider) trying to appropriate the benefits of deliberative effort and actions of others without incurring any of the costs required to generate them. Thus, fewer voters go to the polls, fewer shareholders raise their voices on boards and readers increasingly demanding independence and objectivity to their means. A system that aspires to moral regeneration, requires its members to assume the cost of short-term signified, saying no when appropriate and to propose alternative strategies. The careful deliberation, not only to choose the appropriate means to desired ends, but also and especially in critically analyze and decide what should be for that purpose. And nobody but ourselves we can or should do. The man fought for centuries to come off the yoke of religion and morality would be meaningless now delivered by indifference or inaction.
The third obstacle to our ability to react is precisely our inability to accept the moral failure, learn from it and take steps to overcome it. It is quite common to recognize that one learns from mistakes rather than successes. But something else is failure. We assume costs because we believe that this is an irreversible stain, the beginning of the end of our untouchable self. But as individuals, societies and also to make it morally regenerate need to digest and grasp the collective failures. Also here the critical deliberation plays a role. In the same way that all periods of intellectual, moral y al final material han estado precedidas por etapas de intensa deliberación individual y colectiva, también el renacimiento moral de las sociedades ha requerido -como ocurrió, por ejemplo, en la Alemania de posguerra- una vuelta del pueblo a la reflexión y deliberación críticas.
El resultado de estas tres limitaciones es bien conocido. La estructura de nuestros valores ha cambiado drásticamente. Los valores instrumentales, a saber, los que se intercambian y miden por unidades monetarias, han eclipsado a los valores intrínsecos, aquellos que son valiosos por sí mismos con independencia de su soporte. Un sistema de valores puramente instrumental empobrece al individuo y a la sociedad, trunca su capacidad de revolverse and to fight the crisis, on and off the critical deliberation process. It's like a vicious circle: the lower the capacity and quality of deliberation, the greater the weight of the instrumental values \u200b\u200bin our lives on the edge, in a world of purely instrumental, moral deliberation would lose much of its meaning, would become a mere technical discussion in the search for optimal ways to produce pure instrumental value. This society would be inhumane; efficient but unfair. If you do not want to get there, start to assume failure. Politicians regain their financial independence and expiate the guilt, as claimed by Professor Costas, and outrage and passive resistance to play their supportive role and revolutionary. But if the values \u200b\u200bare constructed and performed on the basis of moral deliberation process, that everyone in his circle, organization or area of \u200b\u200binfluence is applied to it. The moral reestablishment of a dynamic and multi-person multi-relations, which is what capitalism has become, demand a widespread change in attitudes, and this necessarily involves a recovery of critical deliberative faculty of the individual.
Eguidazu Santiago is a student at the School of Philosophy.
The economic situation has exposed our inability to make values \u200b\u200band our commitment to produce a negative value. The recasting moral demand system change
widespread attitudes SANTIAGO Eguidazu
All claims a face fault. And also an atonement. In these pages, Antón Costas said in a superb article, moral bankruptcy of the market economy (El Pais, April 18), which until that society does not express outrage against financial capitalism, and politics does not regain its autonomy address this, it may not be a solution to the crisis, which has come from a moral reestablishment of market economy. The following comments are intended to show that moral bankruptcy rightly predicated of our society and economic system that sustains it, and the subsequent destruction securities that feedback, have necessarily had to come from a collapse of our deliberative capacity and quality. In antiquity, moral deliberation was considered essential to guide action, and the lack of it was described as reckless. The wise man was, indeed, able to discuss the trial with righteousness, equity, critical intelligence and practical knowledge. Prudence well understood is inseparable from action.
is common to recognize that learning from mistakes. But another thing is the failure
values \u200b\u200bare not born or die, they are not objective realities or exist solely in our minds, values \u200b\u200bare built through individual deliberative processes (that is, with oneself) or groups (one with other or even all, all). The man, through the interaction of deliberation and action, carried values. This is how moral progress materially and ultimately society. The crisis has exposed our inability to make values \u200b\u200band our commitment to produce a negative value. And it comes shaping, long in the West, at least three factors that have exploded in the water line of our moral principles. The first is the confusion of wisdom and science. Academic economists, bankers, rating agencies, governments themselves and consumers in general have accepted more or less interested, as "scientific" knowledge that guides and determines its behavior, decision models and economic-financial performance that were brewing since the middle of last century, and whose nucleus can be summarized, oversimplifying, the assumption of a rational maximizing agents of perfect efficiency in resource allocation by markets, the technical possibility of uncorrelated returns and risk, and financial superiority of debt in wealth creation . Aristotle was the first great promoter of prudence as an instrument of reflection for action, which categorically ruled mating with their own apodictic knowledge of wisdom and science. The latter deal is necessary, whereas prudence, deliberation, deal with the contingent. By elevating the status of science models that work in the world of the contingent, the man of today has shed has been left to deliberate and take comfort from what the models predict. And to escape from a basic principle of critical discussion, namely, to assume ultimate responsibility for the actions, putting it in the hands of artificial models, little has cost lasts forever discard the obligation to object or exclude those practices or conflicting actions our values. This Thus, we have caused to all a huge ball of fire that has swept away much of what has been built for decades. And I say to all because, although in very different degrees, is irresponsible and unwise that turns to a loan for the sole purpose of profiting, but also accepts it knowing that it may not return. And here I disagree with those who point solely responsible for the morass as the representatives of the financial arrangements reviled. The financial world is certainly a decisive moral responsibility, absolute end to what has happened, but that does not mean that many who have been driven by the mirage of easy money, who have agreed to ride the wave watching away and not saying a peep, not have to take yours. In a truly ethical atonement about not exempt from responsibility to the rest, but rather the contrary, claims that vise offer the perfect alibi for the man away to disengage from their own moral responsibility.
A second reason that has overshadowed the practice of critical discussion in recent years has been the moral conformity or comfort. In any process of deliberation, there are two parts, one another emotionally and intellectually. John Dewey called the first "value" and the second "valuation." Rate is what we intuitively perceive a state of things urges us to action. Emotions habits, customs generate a first reaction, an immediate proposal for our action. But if you do not involve the rational part of our brain, the process remains incomplete, there is no proper valuation and, consequently, no action is prudent. Thinking has become painful, possibly dangerous, in the days we live, ponder, imagine courses of action, evaluate alternatives, anticipate consequences and to take initiatives is to match the times, is less expensive and risky to keep wheel. The usual attitude of people today is that of a stowaway (free-rider) trying to appropriate the benefits of deliberative effort and actions of others without incurring any of the costs required to generate them. Thus, fewer voters go to the polls, fewer shareholders raise their voices on boards and readers increasingly demanding independence and objectivity to their means. A system that aspires to moral regeneration, requires its members to assume the cost of short-term signified, saying no when appropriate and to propose alternative strategies. The careful deliberation, not only to choose the appropriate means to desired ends, but also and especially in critically analyze and decide what should be for that purpose. And nobody but ourselves we can or should do. The man fought for centuries to come off the yoke of religion and morality would be meaningless now delivered by indifference or inaction.
The third obstacle to our ability to react is precisely our inability to accept the moral failure, learn from it and take steps to overcome it. It is quite common to recognize that one learns from mistakes rather than successes. But something else is failure. We assume costs because we believe that this is an irreversible stain, the beginning of the end of our untouchable self. But as individuals, societies and also to make it morally regenerate need to digest and grasp the collective failures. Also here the critical deliberation plays a role. In the same way that all periods of intellectual, moral y al final material han estado precedidas por etapas de intensa deliberación individual y colectiva, también el renacimiento moral de las sociedades ha requerido -como ocurrió, por ejemplo, en la Alemania de posguerra- una vuelta del pueblo a la reflexión y deliberación críticas.
El resultado de estas tres limitaciones es bien conocido. La estructura de nuestros valores ha cambiado drásticamente. Los valores instrumentales, a saber, los que se intercambian y miden por unidades monetarias, han eclipsado a los valores intrínsecos, aquellos que son valiosos por sí mismos con independencia de su soporte. Un sistema de valores puramente instrumental empobrece al individuo y a la sociedad, trunca su capacidad de revolverse and to fight the crisis, on and off the critical deliberation process. It's like a vicious circle: the lower the capacity and quality of deliberation, the greater the weight of the instrumental values \u200b\u200bin our lives on the edge, in a world of purely instrumental, moral deliberation would lose much of its meaning, would become a mere technical discussion in the search for optimal ways to produce pure instrumental value. This society would be inhumane; efficient but unfair. If you do not want to get there, start to assume failure. Politicians regain their financial independence and expiate the guilt, as claimed by Professor Costas, and outrage and passive resistance to play their supportive role and revolutionary. But if the values \u200b\u200bare constructed and performed on the basis of moral deliberation process, that everyone in his circle, organization or area of \u200b\u200binfluence is applied to it. The moral reestablishment of a dynamic and multi-person multi-relations, which is what capitalism has become, demand a widespread change in attitudes, and this necessarily involves a recovery of critical deliberative faculty of the individual.
Eguidazu Santiago is a student at the School of Philosophy.
0 comments:
Post a Comment