The Morality of Gambling

Jeremy Munsell
University of Michigan-Flint Flint, MI USA

A Survey of the Issue

The ambition of this essay is to survey the issue of gambling. The subject will be approached by briey summarizing some of the most persuasive arguments from Gambling: A Preliminary Inquiry by Lisa Newton, and Is Gambling Immoral? A Virtue Ethics Approach by Peter Collins. A criticism will be oered of Lisa Newtons arguments from stewardship. We will consider how Newton might respond when confronted with such criticisms, and a rejoinder to her responses will be oered. Gambling, the act of wagering something of worth that a given outcome will occur, has historically been associated with questionable characters and dens of ill-repute. But, is it truly reasonable to cast moral aspersions on gambling? Lisa Newton claims that, indeed, gambling is immoral. She makes her argument from the slightly antiquated notion of stewardship. A steward is one who is responsible for the supervision and maintenance of property entrusted to their care by the owner. While this is primarily a religious notion, there is a secular equivalent originating from the place of conservation of resources. She points out that though gambling isnt necessarily opposed by rights theory, the legal restriction on gambling in almost every jurisdiction is consistent with the conclusion that gambling is wrong because it is a violation of our duty of stewardship of property. Although, Newton herself says that even if gambling is wrong, it probably should not be illegalized. The question of whether or not it should be encouraged is another issue all together. Newton acknowledges that legalized gambling does bring prosperity to sometimes otherwise impoverished areas. However, that is at the expense of the sleaze factor, which according to Newton follows gambling into the legal casinos. Her nal argument is from Rawlslian justice, that is does it improve the lot of the least advantaged?. Newton argues that no, it does not. Quite in-fact, it takes from the poorest individuals and gives to the more advantaged. Peter Collins, on the other hand, argues instead that gambling is morally justied. He begins, after showing that the standard denition (of gambling) leaves some unanswered

questions, by asking if stock trading could be considered gambling? He answers this question by noticing that the stock exchange is not in its essence a provider of gambling services, instead it gives opportunities for genuine investment. This can be seen when you consider how one is successful on the stock exchange, which is primarily by the exercise of rational judgment. This is in stark contrast to the probabilistic success in gambling casinos. Moreover, ones success in the stock market does not necessitate the failure of another. He cites the utilitarian ideals of John Stuart Mill, whom he refers to as a whatever-turnsyou-on permissivist. Though utilitarianism doesnt disapprove of gambling, it refers to it as a lower pleasure. Utilitarianism says that vicious self-indulgence is contrary to the principle of utility in that it leads to misery in the long run for the individual. Lower pleasures should be abandoned for higher pleasures like the appreciation of great works of art. Collins points out that in the majority of cases, indulgence in lower pleasures does not lead to great misery. For the second, even those who nd great satisfaction in the higher pleasures, still nd the lower pleasures (like fornication) more pleasurable. He analyzes the issue from Kantian deontologicalism. He asks the standard Kantian question, sure you enjoy it, but what if everyone did it?. Kantian logic most plausibly applies to gambling by focusing on the fact that the whole point of gambling is the random distribution of property. An objection to this line of reasoning would be some kind of so-called socialist argument, which says that property has been, and still is distributed according to accidents of birth. It is conceivable that, perhaps, unearned wealth should be distributed according to some kind of literal lottery. Collins concedes that this is perhaps fanciful. A better approach is to deny that gambling is about a lust for unearned wealth, and instead claim that it is about entertainment. Entertainment for which, participants are willing to pay for in the form of losses which they incur as a result of the fact that the odds are set.

Criticisms
Lisa Newton argues the moral impermissibility of gambling from the standpoint of stewardship. According to Newton we have a duty to maintain the property entrusted to us by its owner. In this set of circumstances, one may ask, who is the owner? Newton claims that our families, our communities, the planet, and even God owns the property that we have worked so hard to acquire and maintain. Hence, it is an egregious violation of duty of stewardship to indulge in a day at the races, or even a fun night in the casino with our friends and family. Newtons argument is specious and takes itself too seriously. Her stance seems to lack perspective in that she doesnt dierentiate between those that wager occasionally for recreation, and those with serious gambling problems. She seems to be implying that the very worst of possible consequences are the natural and inevitable end results of the act of gaming. She arms that gambling impoverishes communities, squanders resources, and infuriates God. While some of those aftereects may be possible outcomes of gambling, those are certainly not the only possible or even likely outcomes. According to the National Council on Problem Gambling, approximately 3 million American adults are addicted to gambling[1] . When you consider that the population of people over the age of 18 in the United States is approximately 218 million, the 3 million addicted to gambling constitutes approximately 1.3%. This is about a tenth of the approximately 10.1% of Americans with drug or alcohol problems[2] , for example. It is my assertion that Newtons arguments from stewardship would be better suited to some of the harder vices, such as drugs and prostitution. Moreover, gambling is benign when compared to some of the other vices that plague society.

Authors Reply
While the harder vices that you mentioned such as drugs and prostitution without a doubt are much worse for society than gambling, even legal gaming attracts a certain amount of sleaze. The maa has known ties to gaming, legal or otherwise, and the maa is known to also known to deal in drugs, prostitution, loan sharking, and violence. To see this, we look at Americas gaming capital, Las Vegas, Nevada. Las Vegas was the city that the Maa built. Before gaming casinos came to Las Vegas, it was a quiet town in the desert. 60 years later, Las Vegas is one of Americas most dangerous cities. All signicant forms of crime occur at a rate of about 15 times the national average[3] . Las Vegas is the embodiment of all of my arguments, and the perfect example of the evils associated with gambling, legal or otherwise.

Rejoinder
While your observations about Las Vegas are unimpeachable as statements of fact, there is no direct causal relationship that can be established between gambling and any form of crime. Simply because gambling has traditionally been an enterprise of great interest to the maa, does not imply that the two are inextricably linked. In the case of Las Vegas, this does turn out to be ultimately correct, but not in the general case. Gaming and gaming establishments have existed, and continue to exist outside of maa control. Gambling is a constitutionally valid form of entertainment that can be enjoyed without high stakes or the sleaze factor being present. Games of chance are enjoyed by people of all ages. Take as an example board games. Given that all players are of equal skill, the outcome is entirely decided by a random set of events. The same is true (more-or-less) of gambling, but in the case of gambling we have the added excitement of there being a staked interest in the outcome. So it would seem to follow that gambling considered purely for its value as a pastime evades all of the arguments made against it.

Works Cited
1. USA Gambling Addiction Statistics. USA Addiction Statistics of Gambling: Horrible Persantages. N.p., n.d. Web. 2. 22 Million Americans Are Drug-Alcohol Dependent. About.com US Government Info. N.p., n.d. Web. 3. Crime Rate in Las Vegas, Nevada (NV): Murders, Rapes, Robberies, Assaults, Burglaries, Thefts, Auto Thefts, Arson, Law Enforcement Employees, Police Ocers, Crime Map. Crime Rate in Las Vegas, Nevada (NV): Murders, Rapes, Robberies, Assaults, Burglaries, Thefts, Auto Thefts, Arson, Law Enforcement Employees, Police Ocers Statistics. N.p., n.d. Web.