Is a moral free market possible?

[dimreepr]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

who's ethics and who's morals are you considering here, Dim ?

Humanities, we all know it's wrong to kick a man when he's down.

9 hours ago, MigL said:

And why do they supersede other's ethics and morals ?

They don't, unless you're kicking a defenceless person.

9 hours ago, MigL said:

You do realize that they are subjective concepts and differ for different people, don't you ?

You do realise such concepts are cultural, the upper end of which include everyone, don't you?

I think we're all past actual human sacrifice as morally acceptable... 🤔

[Genady]

33 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

we all know it's wrong to kick a man when he's down.

Even if the man is Gaddafi, or Mussolini?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

Even if the man is Gaddafi, or Mussolini?

Of course, they're already down; "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"... 🖖

Isn't the knowledge that they will spend the rest of their day's regretting their action's, more vengeful? 

[Genady]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Of course, they're already down; "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"... 🖖

It is your opinion. I disagree, but this is not my point. My point is that, as this example shows, we do not "all know what's wrong..." At least one of us don't know here.

[dimreepr]

6 minutes ago, Genady said:

It is your opinion. I disagree

With which part?

7 minutes ago, Genady said:

My point is that, as this example shows, we do not "all know what's wrong..." At least one of us don't know here.

Indeed, no one is free of a boss, so if we circle back "such concepts are culteral" and not for one to decide...

[MigL]

Is it morally acceptable to want the best for your kids? Of course it is.
But we know it is wrong to pay to get them accepted into a prestigious school; and people have gone to jail for that.
Or is it?
Many people get away with it by making 'donations'.
Who draws the line ?

Is it morally acceptable to steal from a crook? Most people would be confortable with that.
How about when that robbery gets the crook killed by his mob boss?

I could give many such examples of ambiguous 'morals' and 'ethics'.
People usually subjectively justify what is good for themselves; there is no absolute morality.

Edited May 1, 2023 by MigL

[npts2020]

If humans universally had the same morals a free market with morals would be a given. However, not everyone agrees on what is "moral" (indeed, some seem to see nothing as moral) which will certainly IMO lead to a market free from morals and full of abuses of all kinds.

[dimreepr]

8 hours ago, MigL said:

I could give many such examples of ambiguous 'morals' and 'ethics'.
People usually subjectively justify what is good for themselves

Yes they do, but it's within the moral landscape of the culture to which they belong; if we can get back to the topic, I think the initial conditions of a moral, freemarket can be shaped in almost any culture. 

9 hours ago, MigL said:

there is no absolute morality.

Tell that to all the test monkey's that demonstrate fairness, by complaining about being treated unfairly, as an innate moral compass.

 

9 hours ago, npts2020 said:

If humans universally had the same morals a free market with morals would be a given. However, not everyone agrees on what is "moral" (indeed, some seem to see nothing as moral) which will certainly IMO lead to a market free from morals and full of abuses of all kinds.

I'm more of an optimist, most people I meet are quite nice; I just hope "cometh the hour cometh the man" has some validity, it's worked in the past. 🤞 

[MigL]

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

if we can get back to the topic, I think the initial conditions of a moral, freemarket can be shaped in almost any culture. 

Not without defining 'moral' first.
( do you consider 'moral' an axiom, or self apparent truth ? )

We should all be talking about the same thing, should we not ?

[dimreepr]

18 hours ago, MigL said:

Not without defining 'moral' first.
( do you consider 'moral' an axiom, or self apparent truth ? )

We should all be talking about the same thing, should we not ?

In the context of this thread (and many other contexts), it's a socially backed guide to fair behaviour.

[Genady]

What is immoral in the free market?

[dimreepr]

27 minutes ago, Genady said:

What is immoral in the free market?

Off the top of my head, buy to let is fundamentally immoral in my mind; in my culture (post Thatcher) that means, taking advantage of a windfall that one doesn't earn, to take advantage of other peoples children/those that aren't so lucky.

Besides, that's a different topic.

[Genady]

36 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Off the top of my head, buy to let is fundamentally immoral in my mind; in my culture (post Thatcher) that means, taking advantage of a windfall that one doesn't earn, to take advantage of other peoples children/those that aren't so lucky.

Besides, that's a different topic.

It is not a different topic because if it is moral then the answer to the OP question is yes.

[dimreepr]

19 minutes ago, Genady said:

It is not a different topic because if it is moral then the answer to the OP question is yes.

OK??? How is buy to let, fair (in this context)?

TBH, I'm not sure how to parse your sentence, please clarify.

Edited May 2, 2023 by dimreepr

[Genady]

8 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

TBH, I'm not sure how to parse your sentence, please clarify.

The OP question is, Is a moral free market possible. My response is, If the free market is moral already, then surely it is possible.

[dimreepr]

18 minutes ago, Genady said:

The OP question is, Is a moral free market possible. My response is, If the free market is moral already, then surely it is possible.

What makes you think the free market is already moral?

[Genady]

Just now, dimreepr said:

What makes you think the free market is already moral?

The lack of reason to think otherwise.

[dimreepr]

6 minutes ago, Genady said:

The lack of reason to think otherwise.

It could be "straight out of Crompton", but you didn't grow up there... 😉 

[MigL]

5 hours ago, dimreepr said:

it's a socially backed guide to fair behaviour

You just kicked the can down the road.
What is 'fair', to whom, and who gets to decide ?

[iNow]

11 hours ago, MigL said:

You just kicked the can down the road.
What is 'fair', to whom, and who gets to decide ?

Sam Harris kicked this idea of objective morality around a few years ago.

His basic premise IIRC was that moral should equal “what does the most possible good for the most possible people.” It could then be fed into a statistical engine to determine more moral versus less moral. 

The problem I believe was similar to your core challenge to Dim here. How does one define “levels of goodness” in a nonsubjective way? Because it’s always arbitrary, it cannot by definition be objective. 

[npts2020]

On 5/1/2023 at 7:27 AM, dimreepr said:

I'm more of an optimist, most people I meet are quite nice; I just hope "cometh the hour cometh the man" has some validity, it's worked in the past. 🤞 

Most people are nice but the "market" seems to reward those who are least moral the most. Besides, once you introduce anything like "ethics" or "morals" into the market, it is no longer "free". It is regulated by those morals and ethics.

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, MigL said:

You just kicked the can down the road.
What is 'fair', to whom, and who gets to decide ?

There's a reason stereotypes tend to be a good rule of thumb, I see it everyday on the poker table, Americans tend to be more aggressive than us Brits (edit/ and ironically play less conservatory) and those that learn their poker by watching it on TV are easy pickings.

Like I've said, culture decides on the rules.

9 hours ago, npts2020 said:

Most people are nice but the "market" seems to reward those who are least moral the most. Besides, once you introduce anything like "ethics" or "morals" into the market, it is no longer "free". It is regulated by those morals and ethics.

Don't fall into the trap of imagining our current model is in any way free, besides it's already regulated by some sort of moral code, just not a fair one.

10 hours ago, iNow said:

Sam Harris kicked this idea of objective morality around a few years ago.

His basic premise IIRC was that moral should equal “what does the most possible good for the most possible people.” It could then be fed into a statistical engine to determine more moral versus less moral. 

The problem I believe was similar to your core challenge to Dim here. How does one define “levels of goodness” in a nonsubjective way? Because it’s always arbitrary, it cannot by definition be objective. 

It's just a variable in the equation. 

Like in the plethora of primate studies that have shown, same effort 'should' equal same reward equal's fair

It's why revenge is such an insidious barrier to enlightenment...

Edited May 3, 2023 by dimreepr

[npts2020]

On 5/3/2023 at 8:54 AM, dimreepr said:

Don't fall into the trap of imagining our current model is in any way free, besides it's already regulated by some sort of moral code, just not a fair one.

I don't recall ever claiming the market to be "free". AFAIK such a thing has never existed but fact of the matter is the market is less free in no small part because of abuses of that freedom.

[dimreepr]

6 hours ago, npts2020 said:

I don't recall ever claiming the market to be "free".

It wasn't an accusation.

6 hours ago, npts2020 said:

AFAIK such a thing has never existed but fact of the matter is the market is less free in no small part because of abuses of that freedom.

OK, let me clarify the OP, the assumption here is the market is free to operate, find all the hidden niches and expand into them; the question is, can we find an algorithm that benifits everyone, as system that doesn't allow money to earn more than hard work? 

[Genady]

26 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

system that doesn't allow money to earn more than hard work? 

Work doesn't have to be hard.