The Common Good

[DISCLAIMER]

Photo credit (edited), fair use

Imagine receiving a telephone call from an attorney who informs you that a relative to whom you haven’t spoken in decades has passed away and left you as the sole beneficiary of a personally owned and operated power plant. You’re told that this is a rather lucrative industry.

What you never knew about your departed relative was that this individual ran a one gigawatt power plant that generated roughly $525 million annually before expenses. Now, you’ve inherited the plant. There’s a catch though. The power plant is a major contributor to pollution.

If you refuse to accept your inheritance, you learn that it’ll be sold to the highest bidder and will certainly continue operating. If you accept ownership of the plant, there’s a clause left by the decedent stipulating that you cannot shut down plant operations.

You have 10 business days to express your choice, as the law firm handling your case will temporarily assume ownership and operation of the power plant until you reach a decision. What factors do you imagine would influence your outcome?

For many people, deliberation regarding the common good (the public good: the advantage of everyone) may factor into this sort of decision. On one hand, you stand to become rich beyond your wildest dreams. On the other hand, the power plant may directly impact the health of others.

Here, “good” is defined as being of a favorable character or tendency. Alternatively, “bad” is defined as failing to reach an acceptable standard. Regarding your power plant conundrum, the distinction between what is good or bad relates to morals and ethics.

A moral is a person’s standard of behavior or belief concerning what is and isn’t acceptable for the individual and other people. As such, morals generally relate to what’s considered good, bad, right, wrong, or otherwise acceptable or unacceptable.

An ethic is a set of moral principles, especially those relating to or affirming a specified group, field, or form of conduct. Whereas morals relate to what is thought of as pleasing or displeasing behaviors and beliefs, ethics – based on morals – are the social rules by which we pledge to live.

Here, “principles” are comprehensive and fundamental laws, doctrines, or assumptions. Giving a personal example, my moral and ethical principles were first instilled in me at a young age by my dad who favored the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Having been transferred from his custody during middle school and eventually to a children’s home sponsored by the Churches of Christ, I learned a similar set of moral and ethical principles. Then, in middle adulthood, I set aside religious dogma and adopted principles of libertarianism.

While there are many facets of my small-l libertarian worldview, as I don’t participate in the big-L Libertarian Party, I appreciate a self-focused existence. Regarding this perspective and the common good, one libertarian source states:

“Extreme individualism” is contrary to the “common good.”

Libertarians understand the necessity of cooperation to attain personals goals. My colleague, Tom Palmer, observes that individuals can “never actually be self-sufficient, which is precisely why we must have rules to make peaceful cooperation possible.” Government enforces those rules.

The risk, however, is that rules too extensive will produce, not a common good for all, but rather a veneer for a system of special favors to secure largesse for the politically connected at the expense of others. By contrast, individualism promotes the common good, spontaneously, as long as no commanding power preempts freely chosen actions.

I suspect that the source advocates a flexible preferential must narrative, rather than an absolutistic must statement, by maintaining that self-focus (i.e., individualism) still requires collective participation. Yet, a separate libertarian source takes a somewhat different view:

One of the widespread misconceptions about libertarianism is that it denies the importance of community—assuming, in the words of the Notre Dame political scientist Patrick Deneen, that “the individual lives, or could live, in splendid isolation” from others.

Another is that it preaches a selfish unconcern for the plight of one’s fellow humans, especially the least among us. If these portrayals were correct, the libertarian philosophy would indisputably not be compatible with the Catholic Church’s social doctrine—in particular with its teaching on the common good.

For context, the “Catholic Church’s social doctrine” referenced by that source is provided by another resource:

In keeping with the social nature of man, the good of each individual is necessarily related to the common good, which in turn can be defined only in reference to the human person:

Do not live entirely isolated, having retreated into yourselves, as if you were already justified, but gather instead to seek the common good together.

By common good is to be understood “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily.” The common good concerns the life of all. It calls for prudence from each, and even more from those who exercise the office of authority.

Though I’m not a member of the Catholic Church, I can appreciate the moral and ethical principle identified by this resource as long as one understands that this standard is subjective (characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind).

This is opposed to a principle which is objective (of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers: having reality independent of the mind).

Thus, I suspect that the shared ground regarding the common good for both libertarian sources referenced herein relates to a utilitarian outlook. For context, one source states of utilitarianism:

In ethical philosophy, utilitarianism is a family of normative ethical theories that prescribe actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the affected individuals. In other words, utilitarian ideas encourage actions that lead to the greatest good for the greatest number.

Here, “normative” means of, relating to, or determining norms (a principle of right action binding upon the members of a group and serving to guide, control, or regulate proper and acceptable behavior) or standards. Also, the utilitarian view advocates flexible prescriptions.

As an example, people preferably should do what they can to maximize joy and pleasure rather than pain and suffering in the interest of the common good. This proposition aligns with what one source states:

In philosophy, economics, and political science, the common good (also commonwealth, common weal, general welfare, or public benefit) is either what is shared and beneficial for all or most members of a given community, or alternatively, what is achieved by citizenship, collective action, and active participation in the realm of politics and public service.

The basic idea is that voluntary contribution to collective wellness will benefit the most people. I think this proposal doesn’t necessarily clash with libertarianism, as long as the common good isn’t coercive or oppressive in its essential function. Of this assumption, one source states:

The common good is an important concept in political philosophy because it plays a central role in philosophical reflection about the public and private dimensions of social life. Let’s say that “public life” in a political community consists of a shared effort among members to maintain certain facilities for the sake of common interests.

“Private life” consists of each member’s pursuit of a distinct set of personal projects. As members of a political community, we are each involved in our community’s public life and in our own private lives, and this raises an array of questions about the nature and scope of each of these enterprises.

For example, when are we supposed to make decisions based on the common good? Most of us would agree that we are required to do so when we act as legislators or civil servants. But what about as journalists, corporate executives or consumers?

More fundamentally, why should we care about the common good? What would be wrong with a community whose members withdraw from public life and focus exclusively on their own private lives? These are some of the questions that motivate philosophical discussions of the common good.

Why preferably should we care about the common good? I know what my moral and ethical principles are. Do you know yours? Suppose you ignore the community in which your inherited power plant is located, focusing exclusively on your own private matters.

Sure, plant operations may poison a substantial number of people. Yet, even if you reject your inheritance, the plant will run. Maybe you contemplate a decision to make $525 million annually based on thinking which you believe is rational (in accordance with both logic and reason).

Here, “logic” is the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable, and “reason” is a statement offered in explanation or justification. For instance, a modus ponens syllogism uses the following logical form: If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

As an example, if the power plant will continue running irrespective of whether or not you accept your inheritance, then you may as well get rich even if others won’t have their level of wellness maximized.

The power plant will continue running irrespective of whether or not you accept your inheritance.

Therefore, you may as well get rich even if others won’t have their level of wellness maximized.

Perhaps you’ve concluded at this point in the blogpost that the power plant scenario is too farfetched. Why contemplate such matters? On a much smaller scale, I could shift from consideration of the common good with a power plant to the exhaust emitted from your vehicle.

You’re still polluting the atmosphere when driving to and from your place of employment. You receive payment associated with work that is directly or indirectly tied to various forms of pollution. When furthering considering the common good in this way, I’m reminded of a book.

As Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) is informed by Stoic philosophy, this blog entry is part of an ongoing series regarding a book entitled The Daily Stoic: 366 Meditations on Wisdom, Perseverance, and the Art of Living by Ryan Holiday and Stephen Hanselman.

The authors quote Marcus Aurelius who stated, “Epictetus says we must discover the missing art of assent and pay special attention to the sphere of our impulses—that they are subject to reservation, to the common good, and that they are in proportion to actual worth” (page 127).

My interpretation of Aurelius’s view is that he valued Epictetus’s belief of how one preferably must focus on one’s own impulse (a sudden spontaneous inclination or incitement to some usually unpremeditated action: a propensity or natural tendency usually other than rational).

This aligns with my libertarian perspective. It’s also why acceptance of an inherited power plant wouldn’t be an easy decision for me to make. What I maintain is appropriate for the common good isn’t something with which all others would agree. I can admit this. Can you?

I imagine that many people would openly declare that they’d pass on the power plant without taking into consideration that if it would continue operating in any case, much good could be done with the money to offset the obvious downsides (e.g., opening a free-care cancer clinic).

This is why contemplation of moral and ethical principles isn’t a simple matter. In alignment with this admission, authors of The Daily Stoic state (page 127):

Here we have the emperor, the most powerful man in the world, quoting in his diary the wisdom of a former slave (and from what we know, Marcus might have had direct notes from Epictetus’s lectures via one of his former students).

That wisdom was ultimately about surrender and serving the common good—about the limits of our power and the importance of checking our impulses—something every person in authority needs to hear.

I imagine that if I assumed control of a polluting power plant, having no option to terminate operations, I’d spend a significant amount of resources focusing on what common good may balance harm. In similar fashion, authors of The Daily Stoic conclude (page 127):

Power and powerlessness seem so rarely to enter the same orbit—but when they do it can change the world. Think about President Abraham Lincoln meeting with, corresponding with, and learning from Frederick Douglass, another former slave of considerable wisdom and insight.

In any case, all those men lived by the principles expressed here: that in our lives—whether we’re experiencing great power or powerlessness—it’s critical to leave room for what may happen and keep the common good and the actual worth of things front and center. And, above all, be willing to learn from anyone and everyone, regardless of their station in life.

Although I’ve spent a portion of this blogpost discussing my own perspective, I’ve invited you to share (or at least think about) your own views. You and I may come from different walks of life, though we’ve both been afforded the opportunity to contemplate the common good herein.

Now, I encourage you to continue considering Stoic concepts such as this. My approach to small-l libertarian principles rely on self-focus while also attempting to do as little subjectively-labeled harm as possible while further trying to balance potential damage with good deeds.

How about you? What approach to rational living do you favor? If you’d like to further explore this and similar matters, then I look forward to hearing from you. Also, may you never face the dilemma of inheriting a power plant!

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Catholic Culture. (n.d.). Catechism of the Catholic Church. Retrieved from https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/index.cfm?recnum=5293

Daily Stoic. (n.d.). Translating the Stoics: An interview with “The Daily Stoic” co-author Stephen Hanselman. Retrieved from https://dailystoic.com/stephen-hanselman-interview/

Freepik. (n.d.). Factory producing co2 pollution [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.freepik.com/free-ai-image/factory-producing-co2-pollution_72617720.htm#fromView=serie&page=1&position=23

Holiday, R. and Hanselman, S. (2016). The daily stoic: 366 meditations on wisdom, perseverance, and the art of living. Penguin Random House LLC. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/the-daily-stoic-366-meditations-on-wisdom-perseverance-and-the-art-of-living-d61378067.html

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, July 16). Can you stand the pain? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/can-you-stand-the-pain

Hollings, D. (2023, April 22). Control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/control

Hollings, D. (2022, October 5). Description vs. prescription. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/description-vs-prescription

Hollings, D. (2025, May 4). Dilemmas and paradoxes. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/dilemmas-and-paradoxes

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2024, September 24). Happy place. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/happy-place

Hollings, D. (2025, September 22). Hey you! You’re losing your mind! Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hey-you-you-re-losing-your-mind

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals

Hollings, D. (2024, September 26). Interpreted reality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interpreted-reality

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, July 7). Non-dogmatic preferences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/non-dogmatic-preferences

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2023, December 25). Perception isn’t reality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/perception-isn-t-reality

Hollings, D. (2025, September 19). Power. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/power

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Preferential should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/preferential-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2025, June 14). Pulled like a puppet by every impulse. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/pulled-like-a-puppet-by-every-impulse

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2024, May 15). Rational living. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-living

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, January 15). Satisfaction. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/satisfaction

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Sensation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sensation

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Stoicism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/stoicism

Hollings, D. (2023, September 6). The absence of suffering. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-absence-of-suffering

Hollings, D. (2025, September 9). The true worth of things. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-true-worth-of-things

Hollings, D. (2024, February 6). This ride inevitably ends. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/this-ride-inevitably-ends

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, February 9). Value. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/value

Hollings, D. (2024, September 29). Well, well, well. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/well-well-well

Hollings, D. (2024, September 1). Wellness connections. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/wellness-connections

Hollings, D. (2025, April 12). What’s the big idea? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/what-s-the-big-idea

Hussain, W. (2024, August 14). The common good. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/common-good/

Levy, R. A. (2014, March 19). Libertarianism 101. CATO Institute. Retrieved from https://www.cato.org/commentary/libertarianism-101

Slade, S. (2018, August 6). A libertarian case for the common good. America Press Inc. Retrieved from https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2018/08/06/libertarian-case-common-good/

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Abraham Lincoln. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Churches of Christ. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churches_of_Christ

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Common good. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_good

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Epictetus. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epictetus

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Frederick Douglass. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Douglass

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Jehovah’s Witnesses. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Libertarian Party (United States). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Libertarianism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Marcus Aurelius. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Aurelius

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Patrick Deneen. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Deneen

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ryan Holiday. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Holiday

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Tom G. Palmer. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_G._Palmer

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Utilitarianism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism