Lane, re: "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."
You continue to question the use of "fairness" as a policy metric. In fact, you assert that; "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."
That's engineer-thinking on a philosophical question and, more importantly, it ignores the real world truth that virtually every decision made by those in charge of promoting the public good necessarily considers both efficiency and fairness.
If you don't agree, try to think of a public policy decision that doesn't require some degree of "fairness" analysis?
In fact, the very concept of our form of government is based on our American belief that being subjected to the rule of government without a voting say in the process is unfair.
As I wrote earlier, it's critical that the rules of the game be fair because if they're unfair then the society will get sick as friction between those who feel they're out and those who feel they're in, crime, and even terrorism, result.
And the fact that fairness requires that we consider intangibles, or that different people can have different views of fairness, doesn't diminish the need to use that metric, or our ability to do so.
We have much in common when it comes to arriving at a consensus on what is fair and what is not. It amazes me that even little children have an innate sense of what is fair and what is not, and they seem to understand fairness even when they're whining that they didn't get what they wanted. If you don't believe me, take something from a small child for a reason that you know is unfair and contrast that to taking something from him for a reason that you know to be fair. I think you'll find that children understand the difference, even toddlers, and that their reaction will be much less outraged when the reason is "fair."
So I think we ought to spend significant time discussing and deciding what is "fair" as well as what is efficient. When fairness leads us one direction and efficiency leads us another we need to make choices, but we should understand that we're making important choices and the reasoning should be articulated. Maybe that's why on many social issues I'm in the "liberal" fold. Ed |
