Subject:
|
Re: someone has to say it...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Jul 2001 03:16:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
123 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kirby Warden writes:
> Is a persons only purpose in life to work for a corporate entity who shows
> no humanity in the regulating of its workforce?
>
> Many of the posts in recent debates, in particular the recent debate
> concerning sexism, appear to have been written by very cold and callouse
> people who may have lost touch with humanity...as though they now look at
> humanity from outside some glass box.
Potentially being one of the subjects of this post (?) I'd like to make a
distinction here-- I think the first time I was forced to realize it was
reading Emanuel Levinas-- the distinction between the morals of charity and
justice.
Justice is that of which I was predominantly speaking during the sexism
debate. Is it just (or "fair" as I said earlier) to give more those who
contribute less, or even the same as those contributing more? No. The laws
of pure justice are merely for equality, not generosity.
Charity on the other hand is another story. Charity is that which says "I
want others to be happy, even if by justice, they don't deserve it." Do the
poor "deserve" food? By justice? No. By charity? Yes.
Which do I live by? Both of course. I don't think I know anyone who
doesn't... Although Tom S. admittedly did sound as if he were arguing for
the point of justice with no regard for charity. But I don't think he meant
(or means) to do such. Do we argue that business should be cold and
heartless (just and not charitable)? Probably not. After all, which company
would you rather work for? I don't expect you want your company to never
offer you a break. I expect most people *like* things like health benefits,
which aren't beneficial for the company, EXCEPT for the fact that it makes
the job attractive for employees. The more charitable they are, the more
people want to work there.
On the other hand, let's suppose (for the sake of the argument at hand) you
had no children, and had to work 50 hours a week for the same pay as someone
with 1 child who worked 5 hours a week on the same job. Is your company
being TOO charitable, and not just enough? I'd say so. If the company
becomes TOO charitable, they become unjust, and often (more disasterous for
the company) unprofitable too.
And somewhere between these extremes is the place where we're content as
emplyees. Somewhere where we feel that companies are being fair enough and
charitable enough, without overstepping the boundaries of each. And of
course the actual question Shiri proposed was is giving time off for PMS
symptoms too unjust? Or is *not* allowing time off too uncharitable? Is
there a happy medium between the two wherein a balanced policy can exist?
Personally, I think it's only possible in theory-- in practice such a policy
would become abused and ducked behind.
DaveE
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: someone has to say it...
|
| (...) <snipped some intersting stuff> (...) Right! People have different ideas of what is most important in their lives, and life in general. For some people it's their family, others their friends, some people are just plain hedonistic and live for (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: someone has to say it...
|
| (...) I think you need to reread my posts then. What I am arguing for is justice for ALL, which would negate the need to even consider charity. If everyone had equal PTO/PFT, regardless of the reason, this debate wouldn't even have had a reason to (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | someone has to say it...
|
| With regards to some of the replys in the "sexism" debate... Do you really think that choosing to raise a family is tatamount to inflicting a prohibitive "medical condition" on ones self? Is a persons only purpose in life to work for a corporate (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
