Structural Sin, and Capitalism.

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Structural Sin, and Capitalism.

Post #1

Post by 2ndRateMind »

So, we owe the idea of structural sin to liberation theology, the left-leaning strand of Roman Catholic thought associated with Latin America, but never really accepted by the hierarchy in the Vatican.

The idea is that sin is not necessarily just an individual affair; that it can be incorporated and embedded into the very culture of an organisation, be that organisation private, public or third sector. When it is, the individuals comprising that organisation are inevitably morally compromised by it, whatever their individual virtue.

An example might be some tobacco company. One can imagine an assiduous worker diligently striving to meet the company's goals, all the while the company is striving to sell more product that destroys people's health, and eventually kills them prematurely.

So, I am wondering if this structural sin may not be embedded into the very nature of capitalism, which assumes the consumer's material desires are infinite, and stresses profit as the sole legitimate goal of the producer. Seems to me, neither of these characterisations do justice to humanity, whether it is in consumption or production mode. They would suggest that 'greed is good', and 'private vice is public virtue' and all manner of similar, narrow minded and avariciously inclined epithets.

Can we have a capitalism that is kind to the world, and its flora and fauna, and its people, or is capitalism inevitably going to generate, and excuse, gluttony for wealth?

Best wishes, 2RM.

User avatar
davidsun
Student
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:04 pm
Location: Arizona, U.S.A
Contact:

Re: Structural Sin, and Capitalism.

Post #2

Post by davidsun »

2ndRateMind wrote: So, I am wondering if this structural sin may not be embedded into the very nature of capitalism, which assumes the consumer's material desires are infinite, and stresses profit as the sole legitimate goal of the producer. Seems to me, neither of these characterisations do justice to humanity, whether it is in consumption or production mode. They would suggest that 'greed is good', and 'private vice is public virtue' and all manner of similar, narrow minded and avariciously inclined epithets.

Can we have a capitalism that is kind to the world, and its flora and fauna, and its people, or is capitalism inevitably going to generate, and excuse, gluttony for wealth?

Best wishes, 2RM.
Hello 2RM:

It strikes me that your 'assumptions' about 'capitalism' are no more and no less than just that: your assumptions.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism :
"Capitalism is an economic system and an ideology based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system, and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investment are determined by the owners of the factors of production in financial and capital markets, and prices and the distribution of goods are mainly determined by competition in the market."

As far as I can tell, capitalism as a system is a 'tool' which may be used for 'good' or for 'ill' and there is plenty of historical evidence that it has been used for both. Methinks that what happens or doesn't as a result of its use is a function of how 'enlightened' or 'endarkened' :-| the sensibilities and motives of its 'participant-users' are, which may also be said about the 'participant-users' of other philosophical/ideological systems (socialism, christianity, atheism, etc.) and physical 'instruments' (knives, guns, drugs, etc., etc., etc., etc.)

The issue of enlightnment/endarkenment also pertains to whether or not and how people 'idolize' (hero-ize) and/or make a 'devil' (scapegoat) out of any such system or tools as well - as opposed to having and presenting a dispassionately 'fair' view in relation to them - I think. Your closing paragraph implies a certain degree of openness to considering the latter kind of 'fair' assessment.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #3

Post by Divine Insight »

I agree with davidsun. Capitalism is simply an economical method or tool. And just as a knife can be used to cut up a delicious fruit salad to be shared with everyone, or it can be used to stab someone in the back, Capitalism can be used in the same ways.

So Capitalism isn't a problem itself, but rather how people use it is the problem.

We might ask whether human societies are responsible enough to be given capitalism to freely use. That answer may be no overall, because it does appear that capitalism is used for selfish greedy purposes far more often than not.

In light of this we might suggest that some sort of economic socialism or economic communism might be better. However, we have examples where those economic systems are abused by authoritative dictators, etc.

So unfortunately everything appears to be available for abuse.

I'm not sure if there could even be such a thing as a economic system that would prevent greed and selfishness. That would be like trying to invent a knife that cuts well, but can't be used to stab anyone. That would be pretty hard to do.

So the answer to better economics is probably not in what system to use, but rather how to educate humans to behave better. :D
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Mountainmanbob
Student
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:28 pm
Location: Lakeside, Ca

Post #4

Post by Mountainmanbob »

Sin has nothing to do with capitalism.
Sin has been around since the beginning of time.

Capitalism is not perfect.
Actually, because of sin -- I see not much perfect here.

Mountainmanbob

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Structural Sin, and Capitalism.

Post #5

Post by McCulloch »

2ndRateMind wrote:Can we have a capitalism that is kind to the world, and its flora and fauna, and its people, or is capitalism inevitably going to generate, and excuse, gluttony for wealth?
It depends on context. If you are talking about unbridled free market enterprise favoured by the libertarian wing of the far right, then I see no redeeming qualities. But capitalist enterprises as a part of a well regulated mixed economy can be a good idea.

However, I think that the limited liability corporation is an ethical problem. With these enterprises, an investor, great or small, has no more liability for the wrongs done in his name than the size of his investment.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
bluethread
Savant
Posts: 9129
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm

Post #6

Post by bluethread »

Mountainmanbob wrote: Sin has nothing to do with capitalism.
Sin has been around since the beginning of time.

Capitalism is not perfect.
Actually, because of sin -- I see not much perfect here.

Mountainmanbob
This is not right thinking. Sin is dependent on a standard. Therefore, there are sins against capitalism. Also, capitalism is sinful in a truly communistic system. It is the standard that determines if something is a sin. Sin does not exist in a vacuum.

Regarding the doctrine of structural sin in liberation theology, that is merely a tool for extorting largess in support of victimology. Liberation theology views the sole purpose of the Scriptures to be the abolition of slavery. Though that view has some value among oppressed populations, making it the central doctrine results in the expansion of the definition of slavery to include any perceived disadvantage. When one looks at the entirety of the Scriptures, that is not what they teach. Their primary economic emphasis is on localism and personal responsibility, even though those argue against slavery, and by extension economic dependence, as preferable economic models.

Post Reply