UI 023: Does is Feel Good or Does it DO Good?

Dennis Prager's most recent article was "Does it Feel Good -- or Do Good?" (Oct. 22, 2013) and the point of the article was to wrestle with people's tendencies to act in ways that may cause them to feel good (and likely with good intentions), but nonetheless the results are null at best and destructive at worst.  This common behavior is contrasted with the other way of acting which is primarily driven by results… will it actually do good? While Prager's article goes largely into the political, I will try to keep the subject global-macro in one sense, and personal-micro in another sense. His question is great, and one that Thomas Sowell and other social policy interested people deal with regularly.  Why? Because often times what is regarded as social policy for the welfare of society, can ultimately be a source of more problems and denigration of the society it was intending to help. For instance, in an effort to bring about greater "equality" policy may be enacted to create an environment for that to happen more readily.  Ironically, the policy itself creates inequality because it will affect one part of society one way and the other part of society the opposite way.  The policy will necessarily create new (and likely greater) divisions than previously held.  Though the policy makers may feel good about their new "equality" policy, the fact remains the policy does not do good (and likely will cause harm.) As an abstract example, imagine that it has been determined that overweight kids are descrimated against when coaches are picking teams for sports.  A policy is enacted to make all kids equal in terms of weight.  Since the overweight children cannot lose weight immediately, the other children will therefore try out for the team wearing weighted vests so as to create an equal playing field. Now while this policy may feel good to those who proposed and supported it, it is fairly obvious that this policy will not do good, and will likely cause harm.  The coaches will still discriminate based on athleticism, intelligence, teamwork, etc.  The overweight kids won't be incentivized to lose weight.  Any over weight kid who makes the team will be considered a lesser team member because their admission could be based on policy rather than ability.  The other kids will be incentivized to gain weight.  Undoubtedly some of the smaller kids will be injured from trying to play with the extra weight.  And of course the sport itself will be damaged in the final analysis.  No one wins, but the policy makers feel good  about themselves and their efforts. As Prager points out in his article: "In the personal sphere, many parents, especially in this last generation, have done what feels good rather than what does good. It feels good to give one's children what they want, but it rarely does good. It feels good to build children's false self-esteem -- giving them trophies for no achievement, for example -- but it doesn't do good. It feels good to provide one's adult children with money and other material benefits when they should be providing for themselves, but it doesn't do good. And it feels good to coddle children rather than discipline them. But it doesn't do good."