FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233  
234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   >>   >|  
? This is a matter of my ethical point of view. Do I want them at the price demanded or at what price and how many? This is the economic question and it obviously is a question wholly ethical in import--more broadly and inclusively ethical, in fact, than the ethical question in its earlier and more humanly inviting form. And what we have now to see is the fact that no consideration that has a bearing upon the problem in its ethical phase can lose its importance and relevance in the subsequent phase. There can be no restriction of the economic interest, for example, to egoism. If on general principles I would really rather use goods produced in safe and cleanly factories or produced by "union labor," there is no possible reason why this should not incline me to pay the higher prices that such goods may cost and make the needful readjustment in my budget. Is there reason why my valuation of these goods should _not_ thus be the decisive act that takes me out of one relation to industrial workers and sets me in another--can anything else, indeed, quite so distinctly do this? For economic valuation is only the fixation of a purchase price, or an exchange relation in terms of price and quantity, upon which two schemes of life, two differing perspectives of social contact and relationship converge--the scheme of life from which I am departing and the one upon which I have resolved to make my hazard. It is this election, this transition, that the purchase price expresses--drawing all the strands of interest and action into a knot so that a single grasp may seize them. The only essential egoism in the case lies in the "subjectivism" of the fact that inevitably the emergency and the act are mine and not another's. This is the "egocentric predicament" in its ethical aspect. And the egocentric predicament proves Hobbes and La Rochefoucauld as little as it proves Berkeley or Karl Pearson. No social interest, no objective interest of any sort, is shown ungenuine by my remembering in season that if I cannot fill my coal-bin I shall freeze.[57] Sec. 15. This logical and psychological continuity of the ethical and economic problems suggests certain general considerations of some practical interest. In the first place as to "egoism." I am, let us say, an employer. If I am interested in procuring just "labor," in the sense of foot-pounds of energy, then undoubtedly labor performed under safe and healthful conditions is worth no more to
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233  
234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
ethical
 

interest

 

economic

 

egoism

 

question

 

valuation

 

reason

 

produced

 

egocentric

 
proves

relation

 

predicament

 

general

 

social

 

purchase

 

Hobbes

 

drawing

 
expresses
 
Berkeley
 
Rochefoucauld

essential

 

election

 

Pearson

 

transition

 

subjectivism

 

single

 

action

 

aspect

 
inevitably
 

emergency


strands
 
employer
 

interested

 
procuring
 
practical
 
healthful
 

conditions

 

performed

 
undoubtedly
 
pounds

energy
 

considerations

 

season

 
remembering
 
ungenuine
 

objective

 

psychological

 

continuity

 

problems

 

suggests