Should the state try to influence our priorities? (Venue: Caffè Nero)

(Scroll down for topic intro)

THE VENUE: Caffè Nero

It is now autumn, so we will meet indoors for the next few months.

When we meet indoors, we run the same event in two locations: Caffè Nero and Starbucks, so as to provide capacity for as many people who would like to attend, without overwhelming any one venue. Thus, there will be two events published, and you can choose which one to attend. Please don't sign up for both. This event is for the Nero location.

Note that we may combine the events if one location attracts too few signups. Look out for updates nearer the time. The locations are only 2 minutes apart.

We meet upstairs at Caffè Nero. An organiser will be present from 10.45. We are not charged for use of the space so it would be good if everyone bought at least one drink.

An attendee limit has been set so as not to overwhelm the venue.

Etiquette
Our discussions are friendly and open. We are a discussion group, not a for-and-against debating society. But it helps if we try to stay on topic. And we should not talk over others, interrupt them, or try to dominate the conversation.

There is often a waiting list for places, so please cancel your attendance as soon as possible if you subsequently find you can't come.

WhatsApp groups
We have two WhatsApp groups. One is to notify events, including extra events such as meeting for a meal or a drink during the week which we don't normally put on the Meetup site. The other is for open discussion of whatever topics occur to people. If you would like to join either or both groups, please send a note of the phone number you would like to use to Richard Baron on: website.audible238@passmail.net. (This is an alias that can be discarded if it attracts spam, hence the odd words.)

THE TOPIC: Should the state try to influence our priorities?

Thank you to Richard for preparing this week's topic.

Different people have different priorities. They may attach great importance to any or all of the following (and plenty of other things too), and may do so in relation to themselves, their families, their countries, or the world:

Material prosperity
Education
Personal achievement
Individual liberty
Social harmony
Democracy
Security of person and property
Family
A religion and its values and prohibitions
National independence
National security
World peace

Political parties will latch on to such priorities and promise to promote them. But should the state itself promote some more than others? The state might for example use the education system, public broadcasting, or speeches by government figures to do this. Or should the state be neutral, and not try to influence priorities at all?

In favour of influence

There can be conflict, for example between individual liberty and social harmony. If some priorities are successfully promoted over others, some conflicts may be avoided.

Some priorities support others. For example, material prosperity and education make it easier to secure a country against outside threats. Intervention may promote a coherent package of priorities, rather than one in which the achievement of some is placed out of reach because others are not pursued. This may be a matter of promoting an image of the country in which some good things are particularly accentuated.

We live in societies, and should be steered away from priorities where pursuing them would make life unsatisfactory for other people. For example, fervent promotion of a religion might make others uncomfortable and might lead to intolerance on both sides.

History shows that some things, like the rule of law and democracy, are always at risk, and once lost, hard to retrieve. There may be a case for doing everything possible to ingrain those values, for example through civic education in schools.

In favour of neutrality

Each person's priorities are his or her own business. The state should just stay out of this kind of thing, and put up with the people's choices.

State promotion of some priorities over others may feed through to voting behaviour, so that governments get to use the state to promote their own grip on power.

Nobody knows what the best set of priorities, or the best distribution of different sets of priorities across the population, might be. There may not even be any robust ranking of sets of priorities. If there are improvements to be had, they will best be found by leaving people to experiment. And we do need openness to experiment, because the challenges presented by the world are ever changing.

Do come along on Sunday, and make philosophy your top priority.