Was having this rather stimulating quasi-philosophical discussion with the wife the other morning. Though it rendered me being incommunicado for a couple of days - it's still probably worth recounting for it's sheer existentialist import.
The context was the conviction of Raj Rajaratnam by the U S Trial Court in the Galleon Hedge Fund case and possible implication of his friend - Rajat Gupta,
till just a few days ago the poster boy of - not just the Bongs - but the entire Indian diaspora - accused of leaking priviledged market sensitive information to him.
The question - obviously was - why should such a successful and respected professional like Gupta ("Ratan" - literally, meaning 'jewel'- to his friends and family ) falter thus (if true). The theory doing the rounds is - apparently, Gupta was suffering from "billionaires envy" and wanted to be in the charmed circle of Kravis (of Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts & Co) and the likes (Read article).
Fresh from the parent's orientation at the Valley School - where we heard that, modern day life was all about "management of greed" - I was quick to pronounce it as a case of abject avarice.
But, then came the news of Dominique Strauss-Kahn - the IMF Chief, who it seems had gone a little beyond lifting the skirt of the hotel maid in his USD 3,000 suite in Manhattan. Was this also a case of 'greed' ?
Here, I had a point of difference. While the desire for money and power - can be attributed to 'greed' - sex is a matter of temptation. And, it is not just a matter of semantics, I argued (at m
y peril !!).
When Adam and Eve succumbed to the apple - it was not greed at work but sheer temptation. The same is true of alcohol or drugs. The temptation could lead tio craving and ultimately even to addiction - but the same can't be equated with greed.
There is another point of distinction to my mind - however, subtle. Temptation (or addiction) is the cause of undoing of the self - it seldom (at least directly) harms others. The same is not true of 'greed' , which is necessarily at the cost of others.
The owner of a publishing house I worked for, was rather tolerant of the sexual peccadiloes and drinking problem of his journalists. On being asked why - he used to say they were neither murderers nor thieves - whatever they were doing was at their own peril - so who was he to exercise his moral judgement upon what was, after all, a matter of their personal choice.
But,there is also the story of the honest prostitute who never took married clients -because she said her's was a noble profession to serve the 'needy' and not the 'greedy'.
The context was the conviction of Raj Rajaratnam by the U S Trial Court in the Galleon Hedge Fund case and possible implication of his friend - Rajat Gupta,
till just a few days ago the poster boy of - not just the Bongs - but the entire Indian diaspora - accused of leaking priviledged market sensitive information to him.
The question - obviously was - why should such a successful and respected professional like Gupta ("Ratan" - literally, meaning 'jewel'- to his friends and family ) falter thus (if true). The theory doing the rounds is - apparently, Gupta was suffering from "billionaires envy" and wanted to be in the charmed circle of Kravis (of Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts & Co) and the likes (Read article).
Fresh from the parent's orientation at the Valley School - where we heard that, modern day life was all about "management of greed" - I was quick to pronounce it as a case of abject avarice.
But, then came the news of Dominique Strauss-Kahn - the IMF Chief, who it seems had gone a little beyond lifting the skirt of the hotel maid in his USD 3,000 suite in Manhattan. Was this also a case of 'greed' ?
Here, I had a point of difference. While the desire for money and power - can be attributed to 'greed' - sex is a matter of temptation. And, it is not just a matter of semantics, I argued (at m
y peril !!).
When Adam and Eve succumbed to the apple - it was not greed at work but sheer temptation. The same is true of alcohol or drugs. The temptation could lead tio craving and ultimately even to addiction - but the same can't be equated with greed.
There is another point of distinction to my mind - however, subtle. Temptation (or addiction) is the cause of undoing of the self - it seldom (at least directly) harms others. The same is not true of 'greed' , which is necessarily at the cost of others.
The owner of a publishing house I worked for, was rather tolerant of the sexual peccadiloes and drinking problem of his journalists. On being asked why - he used to say they were neither murderers nor thieves - whatever they were doing was at their own peril - so who was he to exercise his moral judgement upon what was, after all, a matter of their personal choice.
But,there is also the story of the honest prostitute who never took married clients -because she said her's was a noble profession to serve the 'needy' and not the 'greedy'.
I do agree that this is a subtle but important difference between greed and temptation .....at least in the context of the specific example you give. Spare a thought for Pink Floyd's "Momentary lapse of reason".
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am of the view that greed if endemic can become an addiction. As you are the erudite Bong, hoarding wealth even at the cost of denying self can become an obsession ......the same obsession takes the person to sacrifice a little child in order that it would protect it for posterity.
I hope that after your sobering conversation you are doing your bit to check both temptation and greed lapsing into chronic addition!
and, what about the chambermaids at Sofitel?
ReplyDeleteAn other distinction --- temptation is curable (ask Tiger woods), greed is not. Kahn should have backed out when his temptation did not find wavelength with the chambermaid's greed
ReplyDelete