Being Married: Your Competitive Edge

General Discussion
There's a fundamental natural law of all living things: The Principle of Survival of the Fittest. For human beings, that means it's best to live in a society among others like you. No Walden Pond, your society has a good life ideal that you are to imagine is within your reach. Now it so happens that you can enhance the chances of living that good life, should you marry. At that juncture, you're not acting on your own but as a team player, each of whom can lead a good life that your society offers as benefits for your continued team effort. You may live longer, certainly are likely to live better because you've contracted to living in a marriage situation and are committed to your marriage team, contingent upon your doing what you want in life.

I knew a marriage counselor named Jim in Oakland, California. He ran a socials party for singles on Saturday nights that I attended a few times between my first and second marriages. He wasn't married, which I thought was strange, but after learning his view on marriage, I could see why. He argued that marriage keeps each partner stagnated, a creature of habit, not given to pursuing his own self-development. It's true, certainly, that frequently when a marriage counselor is consulted because the marriage is "on the rocks," he will urge the partners to rekindle the experiences that brought them together originally, so as to renew the spark. Personal change in a partner can be devastating to a marriage, as in cases of disabling disease, change of career; drastic alteration in earning power through job loss. I think a marriage counselor hopes to get each spouse to show commitment to the team once again, if only they can be made to realize that success in living can be each of theirs through their efforts on behalf of the team! Separation and divorce initiated by your partner is a public declaration that you need to strive harder to reach the social well-being you want in your life!

Marriage gives an advantage to leading the good life based on assuming marital responsibilities. I think the male's use of Viagra is symptomatic of his desire to keep sex in the marriage--just as it has always been. He's trying to live up to his past performance during marriage. Similarly, the spouse needs to have a good job and if the marriage is based on a two salary income, then the partner must also. They should be willing to pool their assets, including their monies. When one team member becomes sick, the other should to do more to keep the marriage healthy. In most marriages, kids are wanted; but must be adequately supported. Lots of marriage responsibilities.

Government is the overseer to your contract, critical when a team member fails to live up to his responsibilities through such anti-social behaviors as excessive drinking or drug-taking; or gambling; or doing violence. Government will in these situations dissolve the marriage, and try to help the partner re-adjust.

The typical plan for the good life that society offers its members
You know the plan by heart, since third grade. Get your education for a good-paying job, preferably in a profession. Take the job you feel comfortable in working. Buy a really nice car. Find a mate through dating. Get married; go from renting an apartment to owning a house that the two of you can afford. Pool your monies. Have kids; get life insurance. Save for retirement and as a parent passes on, add what assets are left you to your team's. Say "Off you go!" to your kids--one by one. At mid-life crisis, think about what you could have done with your life; and how much better life could have been; but don't change anything! Get a watch at your retirement party. Go off travelling with your mate in your waning years. Prepare yourself for the diseases of old-age; and have enough money set aside for a burial plot and a decent funeral. In your will, leave the house to your surviving spouse and die with dignity and respectability. By becoming a team-player in marriage, you've got a really good chance to make society's delineation of the good life become concretized into "This is your life.!" Having the great car, the house in a prestigeous location, being known in the community for your generous contributions to charity and the arts, becoming manager of little league baseball team, serving on the school board, eating out at great restaurants, going to Vegas twice a year, owning a prosperous business, even being elected to political office--yes, all that is within your reach and become lively options of things to do once you're married!

Remember, that you, as a responsible citizen, are not only endorsing your society's lifestyle but recommending it to your children and your grandchildren.

The Plan altered by current social trends
Because women have entered the workforce in such numbers, and frequently today, are making as much money as men, and because any worker may have to find a job outside a particular preferred location, the social phenomenon of single parenting is becoming widespread (if married, then the partner needs a new job, too). Nearly half of the children are born out of wedlock. But just that you are a parent with a kid by your side living with you wherever you go bestows the stability associated with marriage upon the caregiver! She has the look of being an upright citizen, one capable of assuming responsibilities associated with marriage. The established household substitutes for that of a stable marriage. As single parent, you're entitled to own a house, serve on the school board--in sum, you can have all the benefits accruing to living the good life!

Critique of being married: Where's your self-development?
If you're pursuing the good life as we think of it, then
--Shun anyone going back to school to learn a new trade; or wants to gain more knowledge. He's not someone married people should want around. Changing careers means making less money, making less of a contribution to a marriage. He clearly wants to change himself; he's not thinking as a team player but has only himself in mind.
--Shun the social isolate, defined as not having nor pursuing social goals for the good life; but of being a party-pooper. He may also be an independent thinker, not given to being a member of a team.
--Shun the constant airline passenger. He's likely to have committed himself to marriages at every destination and really doesn't have time to devote to any one of them to yield successful results for his partner.

Mentor System of Education

Remember the little old schoolhouse? I think those days are back. Courses, at least partially online; teacher availability in the classroom and the computer lab; students familiar with the computer well enough to play games on Play Station 2! The new little schoolhouse!

What's missing in this educative scenario is the social contract. If implemented, a contractual plan would be in place, periodically updated or exchanged for a new one, to reflect the student's learning and the educator's evaluation of progress. Today, the student's achievement is measured nationally, even globally, by means of standardized tests. Why should not the student enter into contractual arrangement with his educators so that not only are learning demands made of him but the benefits of his achievement be spelled out? For instance, the student would get a star on an achievement chart, a certificate of accomplishment, and when were parents involved, a weekend trip to Disneyworld, a bike, even money!

Even when a specific contract is unattained, i.e., unfulfilled, the student's level of abilities and skills would be taken into account in writing the next. Hours spent during each contractual period could be accumulated to reflect the difficulty the student was having in any one area of the subject matter. There need no time set aside for doing homework, for the student could limit his study-time to the times he could contact a mentor. I say "mentor" because the time the student would be studying is delimited by the time that someone is available to assist in his learning process, e.g., by answering questions, giving answers to selected problems. What is necessary for this envisioned learning situation to work is the availability of a mentor during the student's learning session.

The nice thing about carefully constructing a learner's contract is the conference at which the learner and educator both sign it. Parents and child on one side of the table; teacher and principle or guidance counselor on the other. The contract thereupon placed in the child's folder. Then, upon completion of the contract or its termination, the parents and child and teacher and guidance counselor meet to go over the student's progress and note any problems and shortcomings by either side. Simple enough.

A breach would necessitate the student's placement in another school, even as is the current practice today. Indeed, there is nothing new being posited here, just a change of emphasis upon the student rather than upon the school.

Current Educative Practices within the Social Contract Framework
Vocational training at most private and public community colleges are using the model. And though today's schools are still organized for "mass schooling" in contradistinction to "student-oriented schooling" herein advocated, as educators come to integrate the computer into the learning process, the latter notion may gain in acceptance. Be it noted, educators would need to know a good deal more about their students than is presently the case.

Adjunct learning institutions, not schools, what are sometimes referred to as "shadow education systems" also employ the social contract understanding. In such a system, a science curriculum is taught in a chemistry lab, a computer lab, and a classroom with an instructor; and through several conference calls in which students and teacher participate via a computer network.

Tailoring the teaching in light of the cultural heritage and background of each particular student I believe holds promise of significant student achievement; and when the teaching is presented through a myriad of technologies the possibilities of attaining even a higher level is likely.

I personally have found the new teacher draws upon online teaching materials though he remains committed to classroom hours of instruction, in terms of which his own teaching contract is stated.

Ethics in Social Contract Structure

Perhaps, this post in the series of Social Contract analysis is the most important. Locke knew a lot about government, but the subject matter of society itself had not become studied until Emil Durkheim and the great anthropologists in the early part of the 20th Century, which culminated in the establishment of sociology as a scientific discipline. This post's content takes advantage of the knowledge accumulated under the rubric of sociology and social psychology.



The starting point of SC as an ethical theory is the understanding that the individual, i.e., the self, is a member of a particular society. His society recognizes his being at birth, when the attending nurse or doctor spanks and talks to the baby and secures the appropriate response from the infant. By means of this process, the baby is welcomed as another human being in the world; and a self (which sees himself as others see him as stated by G. H. Mead, sociologist) is created.



Making society pivotal to ethical issues and questions has certain implications:



1. Being moral implies measuring up to society's standards of conduct. Through the educative process, the child learns how to behave, that is, the self develops; the individual is socialized.



2. Society enters into a contractual relationship with each societal member. In primitive society, that relationship is symbolized in the rites of becoming an adult, e.g., at age 13, when the self becomes mature; and is so recognized by the elders. He has learned and performed in accordance with his training the behaviors appropriate to particular situations. In return for the continuance of proper performance, the individual is given respect by his society. In classical philosophy, this notion of respect is sometimes referred to as "the freedom to act": the societal member is given leeway to act in accord with his own purposes and by his own intentions. As a trained individual, he is not being forced to act as others in the community might want him to. He is his own self!



3. There is continual acknowledgement of the contractual relationship by the parties involved: self and society. Whenever the individual answers the question "Who are you?" he affirms his standing in this contractual bind. For the ascription of one's self-identity has social meaning and grants to the individual social status among his peers. Such claims as "I am a plumber," "I am a student," "I am retired" become claims in society as to certain rights and privileges, e.g., can hang out of a building a professional shingle. Note that the self is always developing, ever changing as he takes on new identities and loses others, which become but memories.

4. Through training, the self takes on moral worth. Society sets up behaviors and rules governing the roles one assumes. As long as the individual stays within the boundaries of acceptable behavior for the role, i.e., acts in accord with his training, he is doing the moral thing.
For example, a nurse whose patient says he wants to commit suicide, because the pain is so great, yet does not assist her patient is acting in accord with the ethical guidelines of her profession. That is to say, she is acting responsibily (e.g. by telling the attending doctor or her supervisor of the patient's express desire). She ought not in any way assist the patient to do what her profession tells her she must not. She cannot appeal to some "higher authority" as granting her special license to act contrary to her training; and regard herself morally on high ground.

5. Since society sets forth rules and regulations for right action, as a trained member of society acting in situ, the individual is not confronted with some moral dilemma he cannot handle, i.e., does not know what to do. The society and its appropriate representative decides how to handle particular situations the individual agent will confront. A lawyer, for example, knows how to defend his client and knows, in particular, not to try to bribe jury members in a trial.

Discussion

Various philosophers in ethics have taken a position that details the requirements for being moral while others have stressed the benefits from being moral. Immanuel Kant argued that one should always do his duty without regard to the consequences of an action. For him, the individual must act in such a way as to demonstrate a rational approach to ethical decision-making. The agent is to treat other human beings as he does himself: with respect; not trying to use any other person but trying to call out rationality from others. He acts from a sense of duty to do the right and honorable thing.

J. S. Mill, on the other hand, argues the Utilitarian position in ethics. For him, the consequences of an act have moral significance in that the agent can take great delight from his moral act. The doctor who heals some patient will find he is glad he entered the medical field. An educator will find pleasure when his class does well on a standard achievement test. That is to say, the individual engaged in actions that benefit himself and his society is economically and psychologically rewarded.

The Social Contract Structure captures both sides of the argument between duty theorists and consequential advocates. For, there is a promise by society that one's abiding by the rules of the social game will result in personal and social gain.

The structure includes elements that are not part of the debate, since we know that the self is ever developing. Concretely, the principle of self development means that the ascriptions of self are open to analysis and change as one's situation becomes altered; yet one's response remains within the bounds of rationality.

I have found personal value in meeting with a psychologist or a social worker regularly during times of change in my life. I review with the experienced professional my past that has gotten me to this point of contemplating the change and seek his counsel pertaining how to make the adjustment in light of my plans for the future. Nevertheless, a review process simply is part of contemplating change in behaviors, whether or not the individual attempts to benefit from the informed advice of some professional.

Occasionally, the social contract is "breached" in the sense that one party or the other fails to live up to its requirements. If society breaches, this would mean that the agent is no longer required to act responsibly--as in the cases of war, pestilence and annihilating physical disasters like a volcanic eruption or meteoric desolation. If the individual breaches, that would entail isolating the individual from society as in the cases of encarceration or being institutionalized.

Typical "check-off" events in one's life that can function in the review process of taking stock of self are: choosing a career, choosing a college, choosing a mate, confronting the mid-life crisis, job loss in persons above age 45, major changes in physical or mental health, bereavement; and entering retirement.

Analyzing ethical and moral issues by casting them into the structure of the social contract represents a radical departure in the field of ethics, for the starting point of analysis is distinctly different: the self in society represented as a contract with particular responsibilities of self and society that should be conducted during an individual's entire lifetime.

The Quest for Social Justice

The quest for social justice is a society's demand upon its government to live up to the terms of the social contract, i.e., do its duty in the performance of the contract.

As I am interpreting John Locke, government is to protect the individual as expressed in his right of freedom. In the American experience this right is stated as the right of the individual to pursue personal happiness. A right is like a natural propensity towards self-preservation, even as conscience is a natural "reminder" to do the morally right thing. In Abraham Maslow's terms, the right of freedom is a bodily striving toward self-actualization, which is to maintain a developed self in harmony with itself and others.

Indeed, it is natural for the citizen to appeal to his government whenever he thinks he is being harmed, or whenever he believes his lot would be improved if some obstacle impeding him in his pursuit of well-being could be overcome through governmental action on his behalf.

Government will not always respond favorably to society's demand for action, however. But it sometimes does, especially if there are many, many in the society who want the same thing. When government does act upon a societal insistence, it does so by instituting some governmental program aimed at meeting the demand to the extent it enhances the individual's well-being.

Mark Latour in his book American Government and the Vision of the Democrats, 2007, sees the social contract as the basis for appealing to government in the social quest for improving the the citizen's quality of life. I think his point of view is the essence of Lockean theory. And we know that throughout history the individual has bettered himself, his living conditions, and his health by reaching out to government, whether tribal or more organized.

Latour discerns that with the thrust to improve comes a societal counter-reaction to hold on to what is and not to rock the boat, so to speak. There certainly is something in everyman to stay the course, and keep doing what has been successful in the past. I think this is also part of the self-preservation "instinct"--not to move too fast so as to sow the seeds of self-destruction. Government doesn't want to go bankrupt through some project it couldn't really afford, either.

Nor does government want to engage in some project of social change without sufficient reason for justifying the program. Justification is in terms of improving the quality of life of the citizenry, as Latour makes explicit. I think Latour's application of the concept of the social contract is profound, but let's see what happens when we apply it to the current political affairs in the US.

The government programs of social security, unemployment insurance, medicare, fair labor laws and OSHA working condition rules are instances of social programs intended to improve the working man's life--signifcantly.

Nonetheless, there exists in the citizenry an adamantly resistant number who protest these programs. For social justice is always a quest from what has been the policies in the past to what are the policies that improve the quality of life henceforth.

Government is also called upon to defend the individual against those powerful groups who would cause him harm or jeopardize his freedom toward self-actualization (to use Maslow's term). To take just one case among a host of instances, the governmental agency PDA stands today as a bulwark against the pressures of the pharmaceutical industry. But to get an agency or department to stand up for the individual, there must a vocerfous outcry!

I close with a personal story. I grew up in an era when many white people believed that blacks were inferior people. Some didn't even want to touch a black, expressing the same fear that today some youth have in touching old people. These whites didn't want their children associating with black kids either.

I think it was not until the IQ testing results conducted by psychologists in the thirties and forties reported in scientific journals demonstrating that white kids and black kids had equal intelligence levels that the Supreme Court could rule with sufficient reason in favor of desegregating the schools. That ruling coupled with the distinguished record blacks achieved in WWII, I believe, led to the Civil Rights "revolution" of the 1960's, embodied in the legislation passed under President Johnson. This achievement is a clear instance of the quest for social justice, as an application of the concept of the social contract: the demands by blacks exercising their civil rights and the response of government in providing remedy to the injustices committed against them for lo these many centuries.

(Interestingly, the government that institutes the social program accrues the benefit of devotion from those who insisted upon it, such that power would greatly be increased to the ruling group.)