Ethics for the 21st Century

People talk about “giving” as if that’s the only way to contribute something. The giver who “gives selflessly, and gives what he doesn’t have” is considered the epitome of morality, while people who actually produce something of tangible value are minimized (when they do it for free) and condemned (if they do it for a profit). This attitude elevates intention (real or alleged) above objective accomplishment. This attitude places the cockeyed, self-conscious barbarism of a do-gooder above the benefits brought to us by countless scientists, business geniuses and those who support them. In short: If you do it for personal profit, its value is diminished, while if you do it for NO profit and only with claimed “good intentions,” it’s good no matter what. Few things in the attitudes of human beings make less sense. Could this be why every human society to date has eventually collapsed upon itself?