GERMAN economist Hermann Heinrich Gossen in 1854 first stated the law of diminishing utility which propagates that consumption of one more unit of a good or service by a consumer decreases its additional satisfaction, the marginal utility gained from the last consumed one. Later, Alfred Marshall developed on this theory by mainstreaming it in the study of economics. Propping this law, examples are there from a thirsty person consuming three glasses of water consecutively while the level of satisfaction gained from the first, second and third dwindled. It is to be noted that more and more water intake made him lesser and lesser satisfied despite the fact that none of the filled glasses repelled him from drinking which is indicative of his getting positive reinforcement.
The moral standard of a society is, on the contrary, defined and redefined by its culture and values in which both economics and economy play their parts. The moral standard is developed, practised and carried down to generations as time demands. It does not have a value for cash or does not have any direct, positive impact on members within a community; but yet, society adheres to it for there is some invisible force in it. It community members through life. At least such had been the bearings of social thinkers and philosophers until now.
But at this juncture of human civilisation, could it be irrelevant to ask whether the moral compass of people also gets narrower because of the repetitive nature of older, value-based family, social and state customs. Otherwise, it might get difficult to explain people’s loss of interest in the issue. Because there was a time when people pointed the finger at a person of bad repute in terms of holding a public office, the abuse of power and as such personal gain by manipulating his duty. But now, the picture is reversed as merely one or two individual are pointed out among many as people of repute in a similar position of public trust.
To elaborate how positive human attributes or moral standard among people are getting labelled as cowardice coated with morality and having a similar fate to that of an agreeable good being repeatedly consumed, the image of the social position and recognition of an ideal father, the second generation member — his ideal son or daughter — and the third — a son or daughter of the latter — could be drawn upon.
As has been hinted above, ever-evolving social value system finds an ideal father rooted in a rural, genteel family only set in a middle class position. This whole conflicting journey wrought with ambition, stress, struggle and adjustment finds a man of principles in despair at the end as the newly emerged values make his children ask about the ‘ultimate achievement’ (or should we read ‘utility’ from a consumer’s point of view?) from such a flight against the wind. As a result, members of successive generations adjust with social standard in terms of worldly gains, social status and stand, power and command, etc. And, the longer the descending lineage, the sharper the difference in terms of leading a life of righteousness and morality for the member concerned ultimately shooting up the curve of social and economic condition of them.
Like the thirsty man’s drinking water, a father’s morally-led life of mediocrity contributes to satisfy the beneficiaries, the family, positively. Although ‘satisfaction’ is not quantifiable, to keep pace with changing time and adjust with evolved value system, the positive reinforcements do not harbour more demand for increased practice of morality and ethics in their turn in life.
Md Mukhlesur Rahman Akand is a joint secretary, expatriates’ welfare and overseas employment ministry.
