Conversation

Replying to and
I could pay a premium for free range eggs and then later ask taxpayers to bail me out when I can't make rent. Equally, I might eat commercial eggs now and then later discover the conditions of factory farming and go ask a priest for help dealing with moral crisis.
1
Replying to and
There's always consequences of all choices that may require going for people who made different choices. It's their choice then whether to give it, and under what conditions. Taxation aggregates and socializes this so that we all get some slack for our decisions.
1
Replying to and
If you, for eg. have a bias towards self-reliance, your choices may be robust to some consequences, but you may create harder choices for others (including chickens if you grant them personhood). That's the definition of a negative externality.
1
Replying to and
Power is not having to deal with the negative externalities of your own choices. It's okay to seek power, but it shouldn't be confused with virtue. You may act in ways that never require you to ask for help, but you might still act in ways that force others to. Moral hazard.
1
Replying to and
This is my basic problem with libertarian virtue ethics focused on 'sovereign individual' type thinking. It often conflates power and virtue, and using power to force harder choices on others for personal responsibility. I'm fine with darwinist competition so long as you own it.
1
Replying to
Everything you say is reasonable. The point of the thread your post prompted is to point out that there are two deeply conflicting worldviews underneath. I think "the everything is interconnected and may be meaningless so let's just be kind" perspective is getting too much play.
2
Replying to and
I think it actively devalues development of basic skills and sense of responsibility. And it is responsible for frequent misjudging of what should be choices between good and good.
1
Replying to
Skills are different from responsibility. I think the world has become rather full of people with lots of skills but almost no sense of responsibility. Moral hazard actors. And they get away with murder by acting like impossibly high skill demands on others is fine.
2
Replying to
Yes. The world is also full of people who don't aspire to either skill or responsibility. If you look at classical goals of education, it has been to combine skill development with outward focus. You can't do this without individual responsibility.
2
Replying to
I think we agree here. To return to the original case of the chicken farmers, my actual prescription for them is: if the deal with the monopoly chicken buyers sucks, get out of the deal and find a different life. It's not collective action/union type responses.