Money as a Metric of Virtue?

Money as a Metric of Virtue?

“There is a tendency to use the term ‘virtue’ in an abstract “moralistic” sense—a way that makes it almost Pharisaic [self-righteous] in character.” My first thought, when reading this and ‘looking up’ the word ‘Pharisaic’, turns to William Bennett gambler, czar, and author of “The Book of Virtues”.

John Dewey wrote the above quote in his book “Ethics”. He further identifies the concept ‘virtue’ to mean a talent turned toward enhancing social values. Dewey says “every natural capacity, every talent or ability, whether of inquiring mind, of gentle affection, or of executive skill, becomes a virtue when it is turned to account in supporting or extending the fabric of social values.”

When I read recently that Warren Buffet had given thirty billion dollars to the Gates charitable foundation I thought immediately of Dewey’s conception of the word ‘virtue’. I remembered having discussed Dewey’s concept of virtue in a Great Books Discussion Group decades ago.

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have manifested for us the Dewey concept of virtue. Two individuals who have used their respective talents to make scads of money have then turned that money into a virtue by placing that wealth toward “extending the fabric of social values”.

Money is not the metric of value here but is a medium for converting the unique and wonderful talents of these two men into a virtue. I never before thought of these two men as being exemplars of virtue but I certainly do now.

Wasn’t the virtue their giving of the money? Not the making of it. So it doesn’t matter how much they earned, just how much they gave in proportion to what they earned, right?

thezeus18

Dewey identifies the concept ‘virtue’ to mean a talent turned toward enhancing social values.

It seems to me that these two men turned their talents toward making money. Of course there were other reasons for them to do what they did but I guess we can say that was a important element of what they accomplished.

They then turned around and gave that money to a charitable enterprise. The money, it seems to me, was just a medium of exchange here. The men essentially converted their talent into this medium and gave that to charity. They seem to be doing exactly what Dewey calls virtue. Dewey does make it clear in his essay about this matter that motive is important for determining the degree of virtue.

You are correct that the amount of money does not in itself determine the virtue. I do think that the quantity given is important because if they only gave $5 we would hardly consider that to be virtuous whereas a very poor person might give $5 and that would be very virtuous. I guess the degree of virtue depends upon the amount of ‘pain’ no pain no gain.

I prefer aristotle’s definition

virtue = proficiency

the christians bastardized the term

-Imp

Thanks Imp. I didn’t know there was another definition for virtue. Aristotle’s definition makes us all somewhat virtuous and Bill and Warren the most virtuous of all given that they are the most proficient money makers.

Chuck, I have difficulty applying the Christian definition of virtue to our materialistic get as much as you can anyway you can way of life. So it seems awkward assigning the quality of virtue to someone inside a system that is totally without virtue. I have the same difficulty having someone charged with a war crime or a crime against humanity within the context of war which is itself the most heinous crime against humanity. I find the situations absurd enough to make good material for satirical philosophical poems. I have published “War and Peace”, “War and Mom” is ready to go to press and I am working on an ode to Bill and Warren. I have got the father and the son and am looking for the holy ghost to make up the trinity of our materialistic religion. It just occurred to me I could use the Pope.

For a few years I guess you would have considered Hitler to be a virtuous man. Saddam I guess would be connsidered as a very proficient man.

I suspect our value system determines what would be a virtuous act. Since value systems are here today and gone tomorrow our sense of virtue would change also. Those who have the ability to ‘see’ beyond the surface would have different candidates for acclaim.

It seems to me that humans are foremost selfish, cruel, and greedy. Our egocentric and sociocentric tendencies lead us in that direction and any occurrence of virtue is rare and we should applaud it when we think it exists.

I am interested in your book. I thought about writing a book but decided I might influence more people by turning to the Internet. Since you are writing another book should I assume the first was a good experience for you?

yes, he was virtuous, and ethical, and moral.

so is satan himself for that matter

those are simply catagories of ultimately subjective judgments.

-Imp

I am wondering if I should answer this? Once in a while I have a brain fart and get nothing but gas. Maybe that happened to you just as you were about to address this post to a specific person.

virtue is to believe virtual goodness even if it force you to kill yourself to make it still as a hope to be, than it means giving what you dont have, givien of what you have is being in a bigger truth that everyone should be able to do to be happier, so when you give something from outside as money without this truth of being means conscience of your happiness to touch care to whom you are giving to receive what you want from him, i hate peaple given to charity stuff, it is such humiliating for the truth of giving and love, as smaert as you are as more you enjoy to make gifts to the best friends you got for your own pleasure to be in their joys, stil it is not virtuous