a functional concept that implies fitness for some purpose (as opposed to that which is desired or approved of as measured by self satisfaction)
At one time humanity was understood as having a telos; that is a fixed and unalterable nature with an essential purpose or function. People understood that when we act against our own nature those actions deform us, diminishing not only ourselves but the world itself. Now this liquid (anti)culture equates that which is pleasing with that which is good. As a result, we elevate things like safety and security, or comfort, or happiness as the highest goods. It becomes impossible to redirect society towards anything higher. And so when we speak of the common good we’re really just talking about popular sentiment. This is what defines current perceptions regarding civil society, marriage and sexuality.
A Functional Concept
Contrast this with the classic concept of goodness grounded in immutable natural law. Good was traditionally a functional concept rather than a emotive response. Man was understood as a being created and sustained by a holy and just God who declares on matters of right and wrong. Man had an essential nature and an essential purpose or function. Human nature was fixed. The individual was seen as an integrated being with a body and spirit. Meaning was intrinsic to fundamental reality. The good of any thing was found in its ability to realize its purpose for existence as intended by its maker. The relationship of ‘man’ to ‘living well’ was analogous to that of ‘harpist’ to ‘playing the harp well’.1Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 1095a 16
The good of any thing is found in its ability to accomplish what it was created for… to realize its purpose for existence as intended by its maker. Only in this realization can something truly be called ‘good’.
-Hillsdale College, The Good, the True, and the Beautiful
Good is not measured by self-satisfaction or personal fulfillment. Good is not defined by the majority. We shouldn’t confuse subjective value with objective reality. Good is factually based. The common good, then is much more than the greatest good for the greatest number. Instead, its the collective fulfillment of our purpose.
Consider a watch. Say I notice someone wearing a nice watch. That’s laudable. But if I learn that the watch quit working years ago and that it’s only worn as decoration this changes things. That’s because everyone understands that a watch was made for keeping time. Once it is broken, it’s no longer true. It no long serves its intended purpose. It’s no longer a good watch. And it’s no longer beautiful even though its appearance hasn’t changed. I respond to it differently now. It’s a clock with no hands. In other words, it’s something less than a watch. A man with no hands may still achieve his intended purpose. So it is in the case of the aged or infirm. But there are countless individuals out there with no physical defects who are like clocks with no hands because they’ve debased their own humanity. And that’s a tragedy. Yet modern society looks at these people and denies that they lack anything. Like the broken watch is correct twice a day, we may occasionally act in ways that are honorable and righteous, but its coincidental at best.
The problem is our metaphysics doesn’t admit any intrinsic purposes. The materialist’s religion sees man as “the autonomous ruler of himself, able to define right and wrong and frame statutes according to what he defines as just.”2Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction Meaning no longer precedes knowing. If the cosmos isn’t grounded in a divine mind then we’re simply the result of time plus chance. This forces us to deny intention and purpose and good becomes entirely subjective. Thus the common good devolves into the greatest good for the greatest number. It quickly becomes tyranny by majority. Nothing is left to constrain the will of the sovereign individual. It becomes impossible to resist societal ills or redirect society towards anything higher. We merely repeat the serpent’s blandishments when we elevate the autonomous self as final arbiter of good and evil.3Genesis 3:5
If we grant the primacy of sentiment, the habit of using the word ‘just’ to describe that which is emotionally desirable cannot be disputed. Human autonomy is affirmed. And when autonomy is affirmed, there can be no complaint when the grossest brutalities are committed in the name of serving the poor and marginalized, or for the sake of national security, the purity of the race, the supremacy of religion, or other values that are deemed to be ‘high’. When sentiment replaces immutable law, there is no bar to Hitler. In fact, there is no bar in sentiment to killing some people if it benefits others.
-Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction
see also: ‘common good‘ and ‘freedom‘
« Back to Glossary Index