Putting the Cart Before the Horse

Too many people derive their life principles from the way they live rather than living according to their values and beliefs. If such a person becomes dependent on or acclimated to some substance, activity, or behavior he is likely to chase after religious, political, and ethical axioms to justify his comportment. Even if he was raised with contrary values and even if feeling and evidence point clearly in another direction, I have been surprised at the lengths people will go to find some relativistic philosophy to justify their conduct.

To be sure, this is the easy way out. Searching out truth and rectitude can be laborious, tedious, and uncomfortable. It isn't easy to break bad habits and to establish good ones. It isn't easy to sacrifice. It isn't easy to change. It isn't easy to be patient. It isn't easy to admit fault. But, these represent some of the obstacles in the way of gaining truth and virtue. It is much easier to say, for example, "I have my own values. I like to _______. You can't prove that ______ is wrong. Lots of people _______. So _____ isn't wrong."

A trademark problem solving strategy employed by McKinsey & Co. business consultants is to break the issue at hand (like insufficient revenue or excessive expenses) into mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive categories. In "The Firm" consultants refer to this as MECE (pronounced "Mee-see") and no problem analysis or solution is adequate unless it is completely MECE. You have to break up the big problem into separate categories that do not overlap and you can't have any gaps. Then, you break those categories down in the same manner until you can't do it any more. This system of organizing information allows consultants to break up the major issue into bite sized pieces. It allows analysts to come up with the individual factors that make up the larger problem. The consulting team can then better innovate practical solutions, implement them, and measure success within that MECE framework. [See The McKinsey Way by Ethan M. Rasiel]

Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman came up with a MECE analysis of society's problems in their book, Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook. They intended the book primarily to serve as the positive converse to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a handbook outlining all the things that could go wrong with a person's mind. They wanted to outline and describe all the things that could go right in a person's mind. In my opinion, their work is a masterpiece. They categorize all the character values and virtues that have been ubiquitous throughout time and geography and describe them to the extent that is virtually unanimous among classifications of people as a whole. Their list is as MECE as possible. It includes:

1.) Wisdom and Knowledge: Creativity, Curiosity, Open Mindedness, Love of Learning, Perspective

2.) Courage: Bravery, Persistance, Integrity, Vitality

3.) Humanity: Love, Kindness, Social Intelligence

4.) Justice: Citizenship, Fairness, Leadership

5.) Temperance: Forgiveness and Mercy, Humility and Modesty, Prudence, Self-Regulation

6.) Transcendence: Appreciation of Beauty and Excellence, Gratitude, Hope, Humor, Spirituality

I submit that these values are all as American as is Liberty and should be recognized as such. Almost any problem confronting our nation can be traced back to some lack of one of these virtues by either some component of our citizenry or by outsiders. I support a Constitutional Amendment officially recognizing these values as American. The government should seek to protect and incentivize these virtues. A pure libertarian might object to this saying it is not the place of government to enforce moral values. In a sense, I certainly agree. Forcing values on citizens is the approach of paternalistic authoritarian governments. I believe recognizing and protecting these values is different from forcing or enforcing them. I am worried Americans may be trending towards modeling government and interpreting law according to the condition of society rather than on the principles that define our ideals as a nation. This is putting the cart before the horse and is a recipe for societal decline. The political ideas, governmental institutions, and law should not be established to justify how we are. They should be constant anchors pointing towards who we want to be as a nation. The U.S. Constitution itself was founded on this idea of intergenerational stability as a protection of the carnal sentiments of a moment or of a mob majority: "We the People of the United States, in order to ... secure the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

When we say, "United we stand. Divided we fall." I think we are mostly referring to these American and human virtues. If Americans embody these values, we will succeed and we will lead the world. If we fail to live according to these enumerated virtues, we will equally fail. American institutions and policies must be designed in a way to first protect American's right and duty to live according to these values of their own volition. Individuals' freedom to act cannot be allowed to infringe on others' freedom to be citizens of strong character. That is where the line of freedom to act as one desires must be drawn. That is the harmony of the American system. We can't be a nation if we have no common values. No man is an island. With the liberty of being an American comes the responsibility to protect the right to live virtuously.