Modern ethical philosophy fits pretty neatly into two camps, the world of Bentham and the world of Kant – the consequentialists and the deontologicalists. Bentham was concerned with the outcomes of actions – how much good or bad came out of whatever you were doing. Killing people produces lots of pain and misery, so it’s bad unless it’s for a greater good. Kant was more principled. His equation for living in the world was essentially “do unto others…” but more thought-through. Everything you do, run it through your head as if that’s the way it should always be done by everyone. If you think helping the poor is important, you need to give a few cents every time you see a real beggar.

Jane Jacobs made a compelling argument in Systems of Survival that we need different value systems (“ethical syndromes”) in different jobs – even in different parts of the day as we change roles going home from work. I’d like to take that idea and go a different direct. We should be principled in our personal lives, but consequences are about the only thing worth considering in the world of politics and policy.

Continue reading →