It seems to me that the richest and most powerful people in the world lack a moral compass, what is commonly called a 'conscience'.
In pursuit of monetary 'profit' and social 'status' any sort of moral deviance seems to be quite acceptable these days because monetary profit and social status gained at all costs by whatever means are easily understood motivations that the 'average man', ie. the public, can readily grasp and accept.
The people who are the richest, most powerful and influential in the world seem to me to view conscience is a big hindrance to success, instead of a worthwhile virtue. They knowingly and deliberately abandon their moral compass because they regard it as an unnatural restriction, an obstacle that makes getting what they want more difficult.
Conscience and altruism seem to me to be intrinsically linked, so a rejection of one is a de facto rejection of the other: indeed, this is what we're seeing in modern politics with the right-wing 'conservatives' and so-called 'libertarians', especially those to the extreme right heavily influenced by Ayn Rand (who was not a philosopher, IMO).
I arrived at this question comparing Plato and his 'Philosopher Kings' ideal of an elite ruling class to the modern transnational 'globalism' of the corporations we are seeing.
So, is conscience a hindrance to success in this world?
For the sake of discussion, I will define success as material, worldly success: wealth.
Is conscience an obstacle that makes getting what you want in life more difficult?
If so, please explain your position and whether it entails an embrace of all things amoral, and a rejection of altruism also.
If not, please explain how conscience is not a hindrance to worldly success.
Further, if in your opinion having a conscience is actually beneficial to achieving one's goals in life, that it is a virtue, then please explain how that works in the real world if you want to be successful.
This is not a questionnaire, so any and all comments / views are appreciated.
In pursuit of monetary 'profit' and social 'status' any sort of moral deviance seems to be quite acceptable these days because monetary profit and social status gained at all costs by whatever means are easily understood motivations that the 'average man', ie. the public, can readily grasp and accept.
The people who are the richest, most powerful and influential in the world seem to me to view conscience is a big hindrance to success, instead of a worthwhile virtue. They knowingly and deliberately abandon their moral compass because they regard it as an unnatural restriction, an obstacle that makes getting what they want more difficult.
Conscience and altruism seem to me to be intrinsically linked, so a rejection of one is a de facto rejection of the other: indeed, this is what we're seeing in modern politics with the right-wing 'conservatives' and so-called 'libertarians', especially those to the extreme right heavily influenced by Ayn Rand (who was not a philosopher, IMO).
I arrived at this question comparing Plato and his 'Philosopher Kings' ideal of an elite ruling class to the modern transnational 'globalism' of the corporations we are seeing.
So, is conscience a hindrance to success in this world?
For the sake of discussion, I will define success as material, worldly success: wealth.
Is conscience an obstacle that makes getting what you want in life more difficult?
If so, please explain your position and whether it entails an embrace of all things amoral, and a rejection of altruism also.
If not, please explain how conscience is not a hindrance to worldly success.
Further, if in your opinion having a conscience is actually beneficial to achieving one's goals in life, that it is a virtue, then please explain how that works in the real world if you want to be successful.
This is not a questionnaire, so any and all comments / views are appreciated.