Pop quiz

by Blair Warren

Here are a few questions I’ve been pondering lately.  I know what my answers are.  I’d love to hear yours.

1.  If you give people a strong incentive to do something you want them to do, do you think they will be more inclined to do it, or less inclined to do it?

2.  If you remove a strong incentive for people to do something you want them to do, do you think they will be more inclined to do it, or less inclined to do it?

I realize there will always be exceptions where “people” are concerned, but in general, how would you answer the questions above?

If anyone thinks that removing an incentive is likely to lead to more of the desired behavior, please explain.

Now let’s get a little more specific.

3.  If a person’s physical, financial and emotional well-being becomes more dependent upon the people with whom he/she interacts on a daily basis, do you think that person is going to be more motivated to be tolerant of these people, or less?

4.  If a person’s physical, financial and emotional well-being becomes less dependent on the people with whom he/she interacts on a daily basis, do you think that person is going to be more motivated to be tolerant of these people, or less?

Again, there will always be exceptions, especially when dealing with individuals, but overall, what do you think about questions 3 and 4?

Okay, let’s move on.

5.  Do you think that being able to provide for oneself and one’s family is important to one’s physical, financial and emotional well-being?

I hope your answer is yes.  If not, don’t bother explaining; you are reading the wrong blog.

Final question.

6.  Given your answers to questions 1 through 5, do you think that people whose physical, financial and emotional well-being are guaranteed by their government have more incentive to “come together as a people” or less?

You can put your pencils down now.

Call me crazy, but if I truly wanted to bring a group of people together, I would let them know that their well-being is not going to be guaranteed by their government. 

In fact, I would let them know that their well-being is not and, in fact, cannot be guaranteed by anyone.  At best, their well-being is a matter of probability and the best way to improve their odds is to build strong social relationships.

From my perspective, knowing this would be the ultimate incentive for people to truly come together, tolerate one another, take care of one another, and perhaps even learn to love and respect one another.

This seems beyond obvious to me.

If you want to bring a community of people together, make the people of that community aware that their very survival depends on their coming together.  Likewise, if you want to drive a community of people apart, tell the people of that community that the government will take care of each of them and thus remove their strongest incentive to come together, to work together, or even just tolerate one another.

Make sense?  If so, would someone please explain this to Barack and Hillary?  If they truly want to bring us together, I’m sure they’d want to know.

Posted on Sunday, February 24, 2008 at 12:10 AM

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

For more information visit www.BlairWarren.com