Did this “price gouger” do anything wrong?

[StrictlyLogical]

2 hours ago, Eiuol said:

Clearly not. It's just shorthand for saying "the people in charge of running the business who decide which values should be promoted in the operations of that business". 

We don't need to go "back to basics", you and I are both trying to use Objectivist standards of judgment here. 

So, the proper beneficiaries are first the individuals running the business, and a consideration within that (for themselves) is about the values that their actions promote in society. But you already know this. 

It's fine to promote products that you personally would not use (there could be many rational reasons someone would use a product that you just haven't thought of, or things that don't fit into your life for whatever reason), the problem only comes in if you deliberately try to create demand through the irrationality of others, through ends or motivations that you know are immoral. And of course I don't mean a contextless absolute - I'm referring to immoral actions that are immoral for anyone by virtue of being human, like being second handed. In this case, with the so-called price gougers, the ends and motivations are positive.

I had a typo in the bit you quoted, I fixed it now just in case that caused any confusion for some reason.
 

Ok, I think I understand you better.

Is it safe to say you think Objectivism holds it is ALWAYS immoral to materially benefit from another person's irrationality? 

What is the total tally of effects (long range) which causes this to be the case for the actor? How does the actor lose in the long term? Why always?

[Eiuol]

2 hours ago, StrictlyLogical said:

What is the total tally of effects (long range) which causes this to be the case for the actor? How does the actor lose in the long term? Why always?

Receiving the benefit without intending to would be fine. It's different if you to popularize irrationality. I can't think of an example where this would be okay, except some very extreme scenarios when living under oppressive governments. "Always" wouldn't be the right word though.

I don't know why you're asking this. You'll have to give me an example where trying to benefit from the irrationality of another person is perfectly good.

[StrictlyLogical]

3 hours ago, Eiuol said:

I don't know why you're asking this. You'll have to give me an example where trying to benefit from the irrationality of another person is perfectly good.

I suppose if the irrationality manufactured was perfectly limited to creating a trophy or collector type desire for what you offer... like a shiny diamond, then if it stands in the same place as other desired trophies or collections, like stamps or baseball cards... I see no inimical consequences coming back to the CEO of DeBeers for filling his pockets with money while causing less stamp or baseball card collections to exist.

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by StrictlyLogical
Reconsidered proper response

[Lawrence Edward Richard]

Lots of philosophical stuff here that I am learning as I read.

Not a prayer I will ever understand half of it but I’m enjoying trying.