Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1915-06-28
Knowing Too Little.

MCooK. Neb.. June 26-To the Ed
tor Of The Bee: In my daily perusal
OF The Bee I have lately been giving a
glance TO the correspondence column and
have come to expect something worth
reading there from time to time. In
the interests of good work, ! want to
pay my respects to a communication
dated June 20, entitled, Knowing Too
Much" The author, by signing bis ar
ticle. 'Nameless." stayed In the dark
along with everything he said. His hazy
views on business" ethics, or indeed, any
ethics, need clarifying in the interests
of the real article and Of his own equili-
brium. He says he knew where his pros
pective customers could get the desired
work done for nothing. He therefore
felt bound either to do the work for
nothing or to tell where IL could be so
bad. He did the latter. received thanks
and remained in a dazed condition as to
whether he should kick himself or plume
himself As nearly as I can tell he has
been doing both.
Let us reason for the brother. You
will notice that he didn't choose to do the
work for nothing, instinctively he shrank
from that thing condemned by nature
and by MANTLE violation Of the law of
compensation. Of balance. of reciprocity.
He could not suppose his customer
needed charlty-for he expected TO pay
for the work. Yet, he insulted him by
suggesting that he would probably pre-
fer to accept free service. That mean
suggestion from such a respectable
source looked good to the customer and
he went to It." "Nameless'' then COM
plains that he got IL in the neck" Tor
obeying what he calls higher ethics
than business ethics" TT is to laugh -
Like all mere tasters and surface think
ers he walks around the perfectly OBJ
vious thing and loses himself in a maze
Of. confusion. His line OF thought and
action as he encountered the occurrences
related by him should have been as fol-
lows:-When he learned that his COM
petitor was offering to give services for
nothing TO all corners he should have
seen that II was not philanthropy, for
that can only exist in the presence OF
recognized need and accompanying lack
OF power 10 provide. Hence he should
have looked for an Interior motive. and
the merest glance would have sufficed.
He should then have held himself pre-
pared to expose the same whenever the
matter came up unavoidably in tho course
OF business When his prospective GUS
toner presented himself and desired 10
receive any pay for the services. Name
less should have taken the work and
lodged n fair and reasonable charge for
| 1t. knowing that no charity was offered
by his competitor nor asked by hts Gus
toner, nor was in place on his own
part. That action would have wrought
| no III to any man. nor violated any
rule of business or other ethics.
Here is the whole law: DO good al
ways and only, but do it In natures Or
der. viz; first, do good to yourself In
| compliance with the first law of being.
Second. do good to those of your house
held. Third. do good TO the neighbor.
Fourth to all mankind Do only good ="
The ethics Of business differ only I'm
one point. viz: That reciprocity (com-
pensation) is secured by specific sgree-
ment. while in personal and general in
tercourse. good is done TO evident need
and brings its own recompense Of JOY;
d" IL Is more blessed to awe than 70 re-
| ceive.'" Let "Nameless" get some
| ideals that he understands and then, as
he says stick to them.
q. e. THOMPSON.