🏢WorkLife Wednesday: What if everything was free?

Welcome to WorkLife Wednesday, where we take a look into best-practice leadership methods to make your WorkLife awesome.

Good morning. A friend of mine asked me what I would do if the world went dark. By this, they meant if a large solar storm took every satellite offline, rendering our internet and telephonic communications useless. How would I react? How would you react?

Let’s start by acknowledging that this plunge into the dark ages would challenge our dependence on technology. From an e-commerce perspective, companies that trade goods and services would be paralyzed. For example, you wouldn’t be able to get your daily iced vanilla latte from Starby anymore because Starby would have no way to communicate orders and deliveries with their suppliers.

Obviously, the impact would extend beyond our daily indulgences to the essentials of our lives. Access to groceries, clean water (in some states/countries), clothing, medications, and housing (both for sale and rent) would come to a halt. This would cause widespread panic as people realize that what’s on the shelves might not be restocked.

When asked the question about what I would do in this predicament, my initial reaction is that the world would treat everything as if it were free.

Additionally: we don’t even have landlines anymore; how would we combat theft without communication to authorities?

What if everything was free?

This topic seriously challenges the ethicality I typically discuss in this newsletter. With the provided context, we know that the people shopping for “free” are actually taking advantage of the situation and stealing from stores who legally own the inventory.

There’s an old ethical dilemma many ethics classes study. It goes like this: “Would you steal a loaf of bread to feed your family?” There are a

Deontological Ethics: Prioritizes duties and obligations, suggesting that the obligation to feed one's family may outweigh the moral prohibition against stealing if no other means are available.

Utilitarian Approach: Advocates for actions that produce the greatest good for the greatest number, justifying the stealing of bread if it prevents family starvation with minimal harm to the store owner’s profit loss.

Virtue Ethics: Focuses on whether an action promotes moral virtues and character development, implying that stealing bread to prevent starvation, while not ideal, may be more virtuous than allowing innocents to suffer.

OK, OK. Notice a trend? While I’m no advocate for stealing, each ethical approach suggests it could be the most ethical decision.

WWJD? What Would Jesus Do?

In an effort to solve hard hitting ethical dilemmas, we’ve turned to different ethical approaches which all gave the same answer. Maybe the first thing we should’ve done is turn to scripture.

Would Jesus steal a loaf of bread to feed his family?

I know what you’re thinking… Bailey, Jesus literally fed 5,000 people with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish with a miracle. And to that I would say, “how would he judge you?”

People do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his hunger when he is starving. Yet if he is caught, he must pay sevenfold, though it costs him all the wealth of his house. - Proverbs 6:30-31

In this Sci-Fi hypothetical dilemma, we are posed with the choice of stealing as a last resort to feed our family and ensure their health. According to the Bible, we are told that stealing as means to satisfy hunger, shouldn’t come with judgement, but if caught, be prepared for consequences.

To answer my friend’s question… I would act with a mix of Utilitarian and Biblical approach. To product the greatest good I possibly could.

_{Written by Bailey Hepler}

REFERRAL PROGRAM

Thanks for readin’! As you all know, One Revere is a free publication, so we just ask that You share your referral link with a friend today to keep the Revere Family growing 📈