zlacker

>>jimbob+(OP)
This, along with innumerable other things like lifting the ban on usurious interest rates, is ultimately a consequence of the same phenomenon Nietzsche describes as “the death of God.”

We have forgotten the deeper reasons that certain things were prohibited or discouraged, assuming that these rules were only there because of a belief in a religion society doesn’t follow anymore. That was a naive view and it turns out that many “old” rules are actually pragmatic social codes disguised as beliefs. This isn’t limited to a particular tradition, either: pretty much every major religion has frowned upon things like gambling.

And so in the absence of any real coherent philosophy that aims to deal with complex problems like gambling, addiction, or excessive interest rates, you’re only going to get an expansion of what is already dominant: markets.

Don’t expect this to change until knowledge of ethics and philosophy becomes widespread enough to establish a new mental model for thinking about these issues.

>>keifer+yW1
I think this is honestly ahistorical. While many Christian (speaking about what I know) philosophies would certainly not label gambling a virtue, it's also not widely considered innately sinful. Yes you can do it poorly, but it was always a tolerated evil. I'm not aware of any place other than the puritanical places like America where it's even enters much into the legal discourse. As far as I'm aware, the 'old world' which you reference -- to this day -- has much laxer gambling laws than America. Imagine my surprise when I go to Europe and gambling is everywhere.

>>anon29+pR2
Most of Europe is more secular / less religious than America, so I don't know why it would be surprising that they have more lax gambling laws. That only supports my point. It has nothing to do with the geographical Old World.