catholic social thought – Business, Faith, and the Common Good Institute

— By Andy Gustafson

If you saw the recent headline “Man Builds $80,000 beer fort at Vegas nightclub” you may have looked twice– a young man who obviously had money to spend extravagantly bought 400 cases of beer to build a ‘fort’ around he and his friends at a nightclub in Vegas. Is there an ethical question here?

Our American psyche tends to believe that a person is free to do with their hard-earned money whatever they want (providing that it is legal). Who is anyone else to say how someone should or shouldn’t spend their money? And as true as it is that one is free to spend one’s money however one wants, that overlooks a fairly basic question of ethics– is it a good use of money?

Its obvious that we could all live simpler lives than we do– and pushed to an extreme we could all shop for everything at goodwill, live together communally in smaller houses or on farms in sod huts riding horses and living off the land– and the economy would collapse. But to raise the question of whether or not some things are excessive or extravagant– perhaps even unethical– is not to suggest subsistence farming for all.

In many forms of Christian thought, there is a notion of good-goods: quality goods which are useful and beneficial for people. As Christians– as stewards of God’s creation and as co-creators of artifacts in the world– it is thought that we should work towards creating good goods, not not-good-goods. Its part of living in the image of the Creator, to do things well, and to create good things. This is of special importance for those of us in business. It is a bad witness of our faith to provide bad goods.

Not so good goods could include shoddily made products, products which are harmful or just useless, or goods which are frivolous. Of course there is some personal judgment in these decisions, but there are other things which it is likely could be candidates for not being good goods among the majority of people. $80,000 beer forts (particularly when most of that beer remained unopened) seems to be a likely candidate.

And then there are goods which may be seen to have very little good to offer: Abercrombie and Fitch recently had a new line of pre-teen underwear (for 8-11 year old girls) which said “eye candy” on it– which again, seems to be a likely candidate for ‘not-good-good’, since its hard to imagine a context in which that would be appropriate. Also, its hard to see how cigarettes could be a good good (perhaps someone would make argument for occasional cigars– I don’t know and am not tempted). Casino gambling would be on some people’s list, while others would find it enjoyable. And then there are all kinds of foods which are quite unhealthy for a person– 3,000 calorie meals at restaraunts, foods with no nutritional value, etc. And then there are apparently frivolous extravagant things like beer forts, $500,000 cars or watches, and mansions which are much bigger than anyone could possibly utilize.

Good goods is a controversial concept, because what seems acceptable to one person may seem obviously not-good to another. Goodness of the good is its usefulness, its value or benefit, its quality, and its sustainability. And producing not-good-goods is one things, but consuming them is yet another. On the consumer side, there is also an argument to be made that we ought not to be wasting money on bad goods– especially on frivolous extravagant things. But this gets us into even more difficult territory. Is a $15 hamburger extravagant? Is a $45 steak extravagant? Must everything I put in my body have nutritional value, and is it a sin for me to eat chocolate cream pie, liqour and– most controversial of all no doubt– bacon?? (I had you until bacon, didn’t I?) …

But again, there are extremes which most people can probably agree on– like $80,000 beer forts…

Bibliography:

On the Nature of Good Goods and the Ethical Role of Marketing (Santos and Laczniak)

Being Consumed: Economics and Christian Desire (Cavanaugh)

Not long ago in Omaha, a church congregation was planning to buy a building and turn it into a church. On facebook, there was a discussion about why they wanted to put a church in that particular location. One of the younger pastors of the new church posted that “there aren’t any gospel-centered churches in that part of town”– perhaps not thinking how that public posting would sound to the Methodists across the street in their church (and they weren’t happy). Most churches, even liberal ones, would say that the gospel story is somehow a central feature of their church– they are, after all, Christians, and not Muslim or Hindu or Buddhist– so another distinctive must be found.

Similarly, given today’s AACSB accreditation standards, all business schools are required to demonstrate how they are teaching students about ethics, contemporary cases and issues, and corporate social responsibility, as well as how they have exposed students to ways business can contribute to the common good.

So when Catholic and other religious colleges claim to teach ethics, or have values based education, that alone won’t make them stand out as very unique.

As Michael Naughton has written,

There is a danger of falling into the following logical fallacy. Because
ethics and values are elements of being Catholic, business schools
that are committed to ethics and values must be Catholic. The problem
here is that while Catholic business schools may focus on ethics and
values, what makes them uniquely Catholic is the underlying understanding
of these terms. All schools teach some form of ethics and values.
The crucial question is what kind. This fails to comprehend the
unique vision of the Catholic social tradition and implies that other
universities are not ethical or values-based.

Naughton continues:
When my university began to explore the possibility of starting a
new law school, it initially argued that its distinctive mission would be
characterized as a “values-based law school.” This evoked scorn from
the other law schools in the area and the sardonic response: “So we are
values-less law schools?” This exchange showed that the words “valuesbased”
or “ethics-based” add little to the discussion of mission, as every
institution values something. To say that the distinctive quality of a
Catholic business school is values or ethics is to say little. One needs to
take the step of defining whose ethics, and what tradition. If a Catholic
business school is to take ethics and values seriously in regard to its
mission, a logical place for it to explore is its own Catholic moral, intellectual,
and social tradition. In so doing, it will recognize the importance
of the Scriptures, natural law, the cardinal and theological virtues, as
well as the nature of a profession or a practice. There will be differences
as well as similarities with utilitarianism, deontology, consequentialism,
and other ethical systems.

Of course there are degrees of excellence in how one teaches ethics and values, and there is more than ethics to distinguish one’s business curriculum from others (excellence in finance, accounting, etc). But it is worth thinking about how we go about teaching values in the curriculum, and how we have distinctive values in the culture of our institutions which set us apart.

Andy Gustafson