Gambling II

1. Gambling II Gambling II

2. Peter Collins, “Is Gambling Immoral? A Virtue Ethics Approach” Collins’ Project • Collins begins by outlining the central issues pertaining to the ethics of gambling, and then investigates the approaches taken by a variety of ethical theories, some of which we have investigated elsewhere in this course. • Collins takes an Aristotelian “virtue ethics” approach to the ethics of gambling, and argues that although gambling may present some problematic consequences when done in excess, when tempered it may actually produce good consequences.

3. Preamble • Historically, gambling tends to arise as a policy issue as a result of two beliefs: Gambling is immoral. The government’s job is to stamp out immoral activities. • This second belief is probably more widely attacked than the first. • As a result, anti-gambling advocates tend to avoid the claim that gambling is somehow intrinsically immoral, and instead claim that it causes harm to the gamblers, to third parties, and to society generally. • Gambling provides a good case study for the ethics surrounding pleasure. • Gambling also provides a good case against which to test various ethical theories, including utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, puritan or religion-based accounts, and “virtue ethics” theories.

4. What is Gambling? • A standard definition of gambling involves three components: Something valuable is placed at risk (staked). There is a prospect of winning something more valuable if one set of events occurs, and of losing one’s state if another set of events occurs. The outcome is wholly or partly unpredictable by the gambler.

5. What is Gambling? (cont’d) Some issues that immediately arise include: • Is buying stocks and shares gambling? • The stock exchange is not in essence a provider of gambling services, but rather of opportunities for general investment. • Unlike gambling, the stock exchange depends primarily on the exercise of rational judgment, not luck. • Unlike gambling, in which there are winners and losers but the overall dollar amount up for grabs stays constant, the stock exchange is not a zero sum game. • For this reason, many argue that gambling, unlike investing, “is an irrational activity which is unproductive, at best, and destructive of wealth, at worst.” (169)

6. What is Gambling? (cont’d) • Is there any important (ethical) difference between “social gambling” and “commercial gambling”? • In a game of poker between friends, all participants have a formally equal chance of winning. • Gambling in commercial contexts tends to be set up to make it certain that players will lose in the long run. • This may strengthen the claim that commercial gambling is irrational and thus morally wrong.

7. What is Gambling? (cont’d) • This paper, then is concerned primarily with the morality of commercial gambling in which the odds are systematically stacked against the players. • “With respect to most sports- and other event-betting I take it that ignorance of the relevant facts for most punters is sufficient to make the outcome the equivalent to one which is predominantly determined by luck.” (169) • Conversely, the paper will not be concerned with the activities of “professional” gamblers.

8. Mill, Utilitarianism, and Vice John Stewart Mill • In On Liberty, Mill argues that: The individual is not accountable to society for his actions if they affect only himself. If the individual’s actions do affect the interests of others, the individual will be so accountable. • Since gambling (and consensual fornication, and so on) do not harm others, the government and society cannot morally sanction such activities. • But there still may be reason to refrain from these activities. • In Utilitarianism, Mill argues that: Vicious self-indulgence may be contrary to the principle of utility if it is damaging to oneself in the long-term.

9. Mill, Utilitarianism, and Vice Some forms of pleasure are “lower” pleasures than others. Enjoying great works of art, for instance, is a “higher” pleasure than, say, gambling or fornicating. • Regarding the first claim, there seems little evidence that indulging in gambling will ultimately produce any measurable misery (at least in most cases). • The argument of “higher” and “lower” pleasures is particularly notorious. Ask most people whether enjoying great works of art is essentially of greater value than, say, having sex, and you will get mixed responses. • This being said, on a utilitarian calculus, there is probably always going to be a better way to spend one’s money (i.e. a more pleasure-producing activity) than the mindless, mechanical activity of sitting in a casino, pulling the arm of a slot machine.

10. Kantian Arguments and Gambling Immanuel Kant • One form of Kant’s “Categorical Imperative” is that one should only act on those principles that one could will to be universal law (the “formula of universal law”). • For instance, one cannot rationally desire that everyone tells lies or breaks promises. • Some hold that the whole point of gambling is to redistribute property randomly, and that gamblers are people who want something for nothing. • “A Kantian might then argue that one could not rationally desire a world in which what people possess bears no relation to what they deserve.” (171) • However, as a matter of fact, “property in society mostly has been and mostly still is distributed according to accidents of birth.” (171)

11. Kantian Arguments and Gambling (cont’d) • Moreover, one might argue, gambling is not all about wanting something for nothing, but is merely a pastime in which some people are willing to pay for pleasure. • “Surely, there is nothing irrational about the principle that people should be able to spend their own time and money on entertainments of their own choosing.” (172) • A subtler Kantian argument might be made that gambling is an anti-rational activity and runs counter to our autonomous nature: that we are surrendering our freedom of will by putting ourselves in situations where rationality cannot affect the outcome, and which undermine or degrade intelligence. • However, it is not clear that it is more rational to spend time listening to Beethoven rather than playing roulette.

12. Kantian Arguments and Gambling (cont’d) • “What is obviously true as a matter of fact is that lots of people actually do get a lot of pleasure from gambling, and that it does them no harm, and that they get as much benefit from it as others … get from other forms of recreation.” (172)

13. Eudaimonic Ethics • “Eudaimonia” derives from the Greek for “well being” (eu) and “spirit” (daimōn) and is usually interpreted as the search for true happiness. • Eudaimonic theory begins with Socrates but was most developed in Aristotle’s “virtue ethics.” • “In technical terms, it is analytic that one ought to live the best possible life of which one is capable and it is also analytic that the best possible life is the one which most conduces to eudaimonia or true happiness.” (174) • In Aristotle’s thinking, a life devoted to the pursuit of mere pleasure or money will not be a happy one. • Doctrine of the “golden mean”. • Aristotle argues that we should find the “mean” between excessive asceticism and hedonistic over-indulgence, and live that mean.

14. Eudaimonic Ethics (cont’d) • Gambling isn’t for everyone, but for those who do derive significant pleasure from the activity, Aristotle’s principle of “nothing in excess” seems a sensible route. • “Not only does temperance obviously avoid the dangers of addiction but it is not unreasonable to suppose that it issues in a life which is better than one of total abstinence.” (174)

15. Conclusion • It seems the worst, conclusive thing we can say about gambling is that it is a waste of time, mindless, anti-social, boring, dehumanizing, degrading, and so on. • If this is so, why do people gamble? Gamblers are buying a product: the pleasure of play. “It is hard to make a serious moral case against indulging in the pleasures of playing games for recreation or entertainment.” (175) The money spent on gambling fuels the dreams of gamblers of “hitting it big”. This is, at worst, escapism and morally no different than watching soap operas. And, as Newton points out, there is the chance that gamblers will seriously improve their lives. Some gamblers enjoy the “ancillary pleasures” of gambling: the glamour of the casino, the mood of the betting track, and so on.

16. Conclusion (cont’d) • As well, gambling may actually be good for character: • It may make people less devoted to their money and material possessions; • It may strengthen the virtues of courage, equanimity, and graciousness in adversity. • “[F]or the vast majority of people who engage in it gambling has no significant impact on their moral character at all.” (175)