« Newton, Comets, Life | Main | The Case Against Hume (I) »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Aaron Lercher

Professional ethics for bankers by itself isn't going to be much better than norms on high-stakes gamblers. One can demand that gamblers reveal their sources of cash, or that they should show their cards when the game requires others to do so.

But limits on what kinds of games are allowed, and whether the stakes run so high as to endanger the rest of society? These are matters for the state and its public servants staffing regulatory agencies.

Perhaps professional societies would provide a pool of well-informed and motivated people to be recruited by regulatory agencies, however, and that would be important. Also, professional societies would debate the (evolving) rules of the various games, which would make explicit some otherwise implicit rules, generating an "intelligible account" as Herzog says.

So Herzog's article is very helpful in that direction.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Here's a link to my past blogging (and discussions involving me) at: New APPS.


Blog powered by Typepad