Coexistence is difficult! (No Д`)
Discussions on policies are inherent in organizations such as governments and companies.
Everyday we hold a meeting and we are fighting against each other with the correct logic.
Even at SNS such as Twitter, self-proclaimed critic is thinking about the destination of the state and the world, various discussions are spreading.
Everyone should be wishing the prosperity of the community in the same way, why is the opinion conflicting?
The big cause is probably because justice is not one.
The ideological thought that is considered correct in the discussion is roughly divided into three patterns.
Strictly there are others, but there are tendencies that these three principles are strongly insisted.
① moralism
② Liberalism
③ Utilitarianism
Everyone has civilizations affected by everything, from small to large.
Depending on the organization and position you belong to, it may be Utilitarian or liberal.
I think that it is possible to imagine to some extent from the name, but let’s take a closer look at each feature.
Employee Cat
① moralism
Concept of cherishing moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, justice.
It is also the sensibility that each person has individually, as well as the values shared by the group.
You must not kill animals by themselves.
Do not steal anything from people.
The weak should work.
He likes policies that are in line with general good and evil, and dislikes policies that go against it.
It is very easy to communicate and has high empathy, but it varies depending on personal preferences.
On the other hand, there are lack of logicality, irrationality and negotiation does not come out sometimes though it comes to a conclusion intuition sensuously.
I will not talk
② Liberalism
Thought that minimizes control by nation, group, authority, etc. and maximizes self-determination right of each person.
Free capitalism is based on the idea that individuals are selfish, but if each person conducts free competition in the market, a fair and stable society will be established as an unintended result.
I think firstly to publicly acknowledge and respect the rights such as physical freedom and property freedom.
Therefore, it is very incompatible with communism / totalitarian thought.
A small government is desired for a liberal society to be operated by private self-responsibility, and state intervention is kept to the minimum necessary.
Liberal Democratic Party “that hopes for large government and state market intervention by the state is the furthest name fraud from liberalism.
Naturally self-responsibility is covered freely.
Whatever happens as a result of your selection, you will be responsible.
Self-responsibility that I want to blame someone but I can only see my face
③ Utilitarianism
The idea that social desirability of acts and institutions is determined by the utility that results.
Even if it contradicts morality and freedom, it is only necessary to eventually maximize the happiness of the people.
Although moralism and liberalism are generally determined from the beginning, Utilitarian back calculates from the result and thinks the optimum solution according to the situation.
Although it is the logical thought that is most appropriate to the reality, difficulty is high because it deals with uncertain subjects of the future.
It also carries the risk of unexpected results.
Because of the myriad of ideas on utility (when is it the result and who’s the benefit?), It is difficult for all members to share the same thought.
Forced voting diet
Which of these three principles is the most correct is all correct.
Since all is unquestionably justice, every argument is not completely settled.
Wildlife cats The wise men are genuine libertarians, but they do not deny the moral principle or the notion of utilitarianism in any case.
Each idea has its merits and merits, ignoring any one can not push just one justice.
Let’s discuss some discussions on a trial basis in their respective positions.
Q1 Should income tax be progressive taxation?
Moralism “Agree, it is reasonable for a strong man to cultivate the weak”
Liberalism “To the contrary, it is not permissible for the state to deprive property resulting from free competition”
Utilitarianism ① “Agree, better than taking Bulgates one by one rather than taking it little by little from 100 people, the overall happiness will be higher”
Utilitarianism ② “Opposite: excessive redistribution weakens competition motivation and leads to weakening of the economy”
Q2 Should I have a female-only conductor?
Moralism “Agree, weak women should be protected from pervert”
Liberalism “To the contrary, it is contrary to the principle of gender equality that women are given preferential treatment”
Utilitarianism ① “Agree, women’s damage and male false charges decrease”
Utilitarianism ② “Oppositely, buying antipathy of men, the conflict between men and women becomes bigger”
Q3 Should I prohibit gambling?
Moralism “Agree, gambling is a social harm”
Liberalism “To the contrary, amusement is the freedom of each person, no one has the right to stop”
Utilitarianism ① “Agree, suppressing social waste will lead to improved productivity”
Utilitarianism ② “Oppositely, casino revenue will lead to economic revitalization”
Q4 Should we stop whales fishing?
Moralism “Agree, do not do brutal actions against highly intelligent animals”
Liberalism “Against what to do with wild animals is their own selfishness”
Utilitarianism ① “Agree, if you continue fishing whales you will be in trouble with Western countries”
Utilitarianism ② “In contrast, whale meat is a good source of protein for the people”
Q5 Should I rescue a journalist caught by terrorists in Syria?
Moralism “Agree, it is natural to help Japanese citizens (?)”
Liberalism “To the contrary. If you go to the danger zone by yourself, return home yourself”
Utilitarianism ① “Agree. If the government forsakes the people, the foundation of the nation will be shaken”
Utilitarianism ② “To the contrary, once you pay the ransom to a terrorist, you will be prone to abduction a few times later”
A monster fighting terrorism
In this way, every social problem can be judged from multiple points.
It is clever to judge things according to the content of justice that each person raises than a label such as a right wing or a left wing.
Each person expresses his opinion from a separate viewpoint, but nothing is completely wrong.
Everyone insists on what is right based on their own principles.
It is because he sometimes has different opinion even if it is the same kind of principle that he bothers two Utilitarians to appear.
Even moralism has individual differences, but the direction of utilityists changes significantly depending on target setting, in particular.
Liberals are the simplest and have a hard-to-different nature.
In particular we basically disagree with the policy similar to the regulations as mentioned above.
There are criticisms that the opposition party is opposed only to opposition and not to make a countermeasure, but it is natural to oppose extra regulation and waste, because “minimizing bondage by the state” is the essence of liberal.
Extreme talks The government is doing nothing, leaving it to market principles and private activities is the best.
However, it is obvious from modern circumstances that such liberalists do not necessarily agree completely.
Bird’s rival showdown fight
If you understand the principle that each person or organization puts up, you can see the direction and ideal that you are aiming for.
In some cases, you will find strange places and contradictions.
Even though it says Utilitarian things in the mouth, some people are actually bound by the stereotype of moralism.
Some people do not know what kind of ideas they have, and some people change their opinion only to win the contest debate.
While advocating “freedom” and “democracy”, some people are depriving citizens of the rights by raising taxes and social insurance premiums.
I do not know what kind of thought you are reading this, but if you insist on it to others, you may be satisfying one of the principles.
It is never wrong, but do not forget that the partner to discuss also acts on the basis of his own justice.
Every opinion is always right.
That is why we must respect each other, but we must do our utmost.
