Wonder why value based practices would be applicable only to
philanthropic and not other organisations. Wealth that does not return to the
society is a crime for any business. When at the level of an individual, we
don’t earn for investing, but to sustain and help livelihoods and social
obligations, why must the definition change when that comes to the level of
earning from business. Gandhi’s first principle: Wealth without work is crime
supports that. You work not just for money, you work to carve a significance to
your existence.
Pleasure without conscience - If you do not set limits on your pleasures,
what would be the role of your intellect? You would choose such pleasures that
sustain your health and mental agility, your skills and your capacity to add
value. You may earn a great degree of knowledge yet would that read well if
your attitude does not reflect the finesses, if the society does not respect or
honour; how then one would optimise skills.
Without a personal benchmark for
moral or ethical standards can you live the long run?
If science continued without concern for humanity, there would be only
research papers with no value for the world. If religions do not recognise
sacrifice, who would show the way for people who are physically or mentally
challenged, or people who are deprived?
In politics too, the one who fails the most logical ground takes umbrage
under principles and values. Cunning as
they may be, they ought to wear the moral for votes. He may not deliver all principles,
but he would have to deliver some to stay the course.
If you must live a life with passion for work, colleague, family, friends
and people around you, you would keep at least one by the side. Where is the
choice?
Our purpose is to live.
ReplyDelete