

Good guys finish... - bdfh42
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/01/good-guys-finis.html

======
abdulhaq
The question raised in the article is based on a flawed assumption: that
success is measured in material wealth.

The successful person is the one who does the most good, irrespective of his
bank balance. Therefore the businessman who behaves ethically is _by
definition_ more successful than the one who is prepared to behave
unethically.

~~~
unalone
__by definition__

The definition of success has nothing to do with morals. I'm certain there are
a lot of unethical people making money who consider themselves huge successes.
Similarly, there are a lot of people with no money at all who think the same
about themselves.

The _question_ has to do with material wealth. Any answer that deal in
anything _but_ material wealth would be sidestepping the question. Godin
doesn't deal with ethic, he deals with profit and results. It's why he's as
famous as he is. You might disagree with that method, but that's how he works
and it's what's made him a success.

~~~
abdulhaq
'Success' of course needs to be defined in a context and yes, in general he is
talking about financial success, but the specific issue in his post is so-
called 'spiritual business'. He talks about 'increasing light'.

My point is that for a 'spiritual person', true success is aimed for in the
long-term measure - the one by which we are ultimately judged - whether deemed
to be judged by ourselves or a third party. So to ask, in the context of
'spiritual business' about success, meaning financial success, is something of
a contradiction in terms.

~~~
unalone
I never trust the word "spiritual", especially when it's wrapped in quotes.

I'm an atheist. I don't believe in an afterlife. What happens in this life is
all we get. To me, any effort spent hoping for anything else is folly.

I look at "success" from a neutral lens. There isn't just one form of success.
In my mind, success-through-great-product is a desirable success. So is
success-through-never-needing-money. Both of these can be achieved through
ethical failure. You can make lots of money through breaking laws. You can
break rules to more easily design your product. The question asked was: can
people succeed at _all_ by being clean? And Seth's answer was yes, because the
Net exposes more to people and it stops people from being as easily dirty.
That's a good thing! Absolutely!

Just don't take that answer and turn it into a matter of morals being all that
matter, because they don't. Amoral people are still succeeding in the world,
and I doubt they'll be punished for the crimes they've committed. Some might.
Certainly not all. His point was that you didn't _have_ to be dirty, and
that's a positive enough answer without moral certainty becoming involved.

------
antidaily
'When past investors blog about how successful and ethical you were, it's a
lot easier to attract new investors.'

Relying on the slim hope that a new investor is reading a past investor's blog
just sounds goofy to me. Not to mention that I don't think I've ever read a
post from an investor like that.

------
cmos
First. Always and forever. It just might not seem that way in the short term.

~~~
unalone
_Always and forever._

I don't think so. I think there are a lot of nice guys who've been bumped
down, kept out of the mainstream, even nice guys who've died before their
time. There's no law of the world saying nice guys get ahead, even if there's
none saying the opposite.

I think nice guys and not-nice guys will always be neck-and-neck, and in the
end it will be impossible to differentiate between the two, so it's not worth
worrying about anything other than whether you yourself will be able to make
it.

~~~
cmos
ah yes, they may have not finished first in the 'money' or 'career' race, but
they could sleep better at night.

~~~
unalone
I admire that sentiment - but I don't believe it. What about the man who lives
an honest life, but because he never bends rules he finds himself stuck in a
dull, endless job, who stays up at night and despairs of ever doing something
meaningful? On the other side - what about the person who does things that are
morally shady for the sake of creating something that's truly great? I doubt
he'd even feel guilty.

My point is, it's not black-and-white. And while it's nice to imagine what it
would be like if it was, you can't treat this as something with only one right
answer. Every one has its downsides. That's what Godin is writing about.

------
vaksel
The problem with ethics, is that noone really cares about them. The consumer
really doesn't do the research, so even the slimiest businesses continue to
operate.

There needs to be more consequences for being unethical...then maybe people
would think about cheating and lying to millions

~~~
unalone
What sorts of consequences would you introduce? It's tough to figure out a
deal that doesn't hurt anybody innocent in the process.

