SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: cnyndwllr who wrote (90621)10/18/2008 2:37:40 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (2) of 541645
 
If you have a small child and an adult taking turns at work or play can you imagine many scenarios where taking turns could be unfair?

Like I said, "taking turns is about fairness." I didn't say that taking turns was either fair or unfair, just that it is a function of fairness, one of the options we use for that purpose.

Your example is difficult to respond to succinctly because it mixes a shared contribution scenario with one of shared resources. I will try to approach it generally. In your example, the child might look at taking turns as unfair but that's 1) because it may have been presented to the child as a question of fairness (why else take turns?) and 2) because children, self-centered and immediate-gratification beasties that they are, tend to be preoccupied with fairness. But it's more aptly framed as a question of utility, IMO.

Society makes fairness judgements in every aspect of our lives.

Sure. Like I said, "some arenas have established standards." Or at least semi-established standards. Funny you mention ice cream parlors. I have gotten into arguments over fairness in ice cream parlors, well, one ice cream parlor. I actually quit going to my local Baskin Robbins over they way they handled queues. Another example that comes to mind came up in an Ann Landers column maybe twenty years ago. I vividly remember a big debate over using the handicapped stall in the ladies' room. Some thought it was wrong, period. Others would use all available stalls but defer if someone needing the special facilities appeared. Never got a consensus. (I was on the side of using all the stalls. I thought the opposition was absolutely mindless. <g>)

If they're right then they may well convince enough of us to change the rules, if they're wrong then we'll keep on doing what we're doing and simply label them as bad losers.

Interesting dichotomy you're asserted. It presupposes that fairness exists as a knowable absolute. We may label them as bad losers, but that doesn't mean they're not "right" and their treatment is not unfair.

However you look at it, the majority effectively determines what is fair. But that is a result of power, not because fairness is either knowable or absolute.

Societies with fair and efficient rules stay healthy

Societies with constructive/useful rules stay healthy. Perceptions of fairness will always vary and are mostly overhead, a drain on society as people tinker with the rules or simply fret about the fairness of the rules rather than doing something constructive.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext