On 6/1/2010 8:36 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Peter wrote:
On 5/31/2010 8:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
Peter wrote:


Greed is good? For someone who is talking about what God has given,
and who cites God's production standards, you are probably a
believer. Therefore, you need be more familiar with another of
God's products (according to your belief), known as the Bible. Try
reading it. Specifically the sections of both the Old and New
Testament that characterize greed. I don't think you will find any
support for your position. If you can't read well enough to do
that, or if you don't have the patience or intelligence to teach
yourself, go ask a clergyman. You might learned that the truth is
quite the contrary!

"Greed" is mentioned six times in the Hebrew Scriptures (Prov 21:26,
Eze 22:12, Ps 17:12, Prov 1:19, 15:27, Is 56:11) and in none of them
is greed condemned. In all cases, greed is mentioned as a
characteristic of something else. You are correct in that greed is
not specifically praised - it doesn't need to be in that it is a
product of God's creation. Quite possibly the New Testament has a
different spin - I don't
know. I'm equally in the dark regarding the content of the Newer
Testament (the Koran) and the Newest Testament (Book of Mormon).

In my view, greed is good. Admittedly, greed has to be handled more
gingerly than some other emotions, but it is good.

A more concrete example would be dynamite compared to a bowling ball.
Dynamite has the capacity to do great good when used correctly and
terrible harm when handled improperly. A bowling ball has only an
insignificant possibility of causing harm.

Here's a thought experiment: Imagine yourself standing behind Jonas
Salk as he peered through his microscope. He was motivated to spend
many sleepless nights by the horror of small children in iron lungs,
but it's reasonable to believe he was, in part, motivated by
feelings and emotions that many religious people would consider
sinful! He probably had some ENVY of Sabin, who was getting all the
publicity. He quite possibly HATED the virus he was studying. He was
probably seeking PRIDE in his work and hoping, someday, that people
would pat him on the back and call him a nice guy. And he was
probably GREEDY enough to think "If I can whip this problem, I can
get enough money to do the research I want to do without having to
suck up to the bureacrats and fill out interminable grant
applications!" So, because of these 'despicable' motives (and a lot of
altruistic
ones), we've virtually eradicated Polio within your lifetime and
mine. And you can thank "greed" - at least partially.


First of all, the Salk vaccine was first on the market and first
used. Quoting from Wikipedia, "The first was developed by Jonas Salk
and first tested in 1952. Announced to the world by Salk on April 12,
1955, it consists of an injected dose of inactivated (dead)
poliovirus. An oral vaccine was developed by Albert Sabin using
attenuated poliovirus. Human trials of Sabin's vaccine began in 1957
and it was licensed in 1962." If anything, Sabin would have had the
motivation to get some of the recognition that Salk had already
received. I had the opportunity to meet and speak with Dr. Sabin on
more than one occasion. It's sad to see you confuse or conflate
greed with altruism.

My mistake. So switch the names in my example. I was not confusing greed
with altruism. I simply said that PART of the motivations for Salk/Sabin
(pick one) were sufficient, in some people's mind, to damn him to
everlasting Hell.


You're careless with the facts spills over into all of your postings.

By the way, as far as your contention that "greed is good", have you bothered to
look up the definition of the word "greed"? In my dictionary (American
Heritage), it is, "an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than one needs
or deserves".

If you want to rethink your statement, and defend a position that competition is
good, or ambition is good, or a desire to better one's self is good, you are
more likely to make a credible case.