In this blog post, we’ll examine—through group activities and real-life examples—why living by community norms ultimately benefits individuals in the long run.
Throughout our lives, we find ourselves at a crossroads of choice at every moment. Sometimes we make the choice that is most advantageous to ourselves, regardless of others; other times, we make a choice based on our conscience, even if it means suffering a personal loss. So, in these various moments of choice, is there a reason to accept a loss and make the right choice? In other words, why should we live righteously?
Of course, there can be no single standard for “rightness.” However, in this article, I will define “rightness” as adhering to the norms established by society. Conscience is formed through learning; from childhood, we have been taught to follow these norms. In other words, acting rightly by adhering to norms can be said to mean following our learned conscience.
If acting in accordance with one’s conscience does not conflict with personal interests, one can naturally act according to that conscience. However, as mentioned earlier, we sometimes find ourselves in situations where we must choose between living righteously by following our conscience and pursuing our personal interests. A prime example is group work, which students cannot avoid. In group work, there comes a moment when we must decide whether to “cooperate or free-ride.” The essence of group work is that, based on the premise that all members must cooperate, acting in accordance with the norms is the correct course of action. However, since group work is generally demanding, doing nothing while reaping the rewards—that is, free-riding—may actually be more beneficial to the individual.
Let’s simplify the process of group work into cooperation versus free-riding, and the outcome into a good grade versus a bad grade. Since group project grades are usually determined by the group’s final output, even if I free-ride, I’ll still receive a good grade as long as the group performs well. In this context, choosing to cooperate is a matter of following one’s conscience, while free-riding is choosing the option that benefits oneself the most. When considering only personal gain, free-riding can be more tempting than cooperation.
But what about the group as a whole? If some group members choose to free-ride, the other members who chose to cooperate out of conscience will have to shoulder the burden. Naturally, it is far more efficient for everyone to cooperate, and the results will be better.
So, is there a reason to give up personal gain and choose the group’s benefit? It is because the group’s success leads directly to my own success. My grade will only be good if the group’s final product is good. Conversely, if I choose to free-ride and other group members also pursue only their own interests by free-riding, the group will collapse, no final product will be produced, and my own grade will suffer as well. While free-riding may seem beneficial to the individual at first glance, maintaining the group actually benefits me in the long run.
This principle applies from a collective and long-term perspective. From a purely individual and short-term perspective, it is easy to think that free-riding is the most beneficial path. Especially in situations where there are no sanctions, people tend to choose immediate gains. Therefore, institutional mechanisms are needed to prevent free-riding. The current method of grading based solely on the group’s final output—where those who cooperate and those who free-ride receive the same grade—can actually encourage free-riding.
Ultimately, assigning individual grades based on the degree of cooperation in group activities would be an effective way to prevent free-riding. To achieve this, group members should be required to write reports detailing their specific contributions, and individual grades should be determined based on these reports. This way, no matter how excellent the group’s final product is, those who did not cooperate will be unable to document their contributions in the report and thus cannot receive a good grade. This approach would motivate group members to cooperate, and if everyone cooperates, the group’s performance would improve as well. Consequently, all group members would achieve better results.
Of course, this method may involve a certain degree of coercion regarding cooperation, which could somewhat conflict with the spirit of group activities that emphasize voluntary collaboration. However, it is fair to prevent those who do not participate from receiving good grades. Furthermore, by introducing a certain degree of compulsion, group work can become an opportunity to learn about teamwork and cooperation. Even for those who cooperate reluctantly to avoid receiving a low grade, the outcome will still be better than if everyone had failed to participate diligently.
In summary, group work yields the best results when all members cooperate, and this leads to good grades. The most important factor for optimal group work is everyone’s cooperation. If all members follow the established rules and work together, I can be assured that the group’s outcome will be good even if I simply fulfill my own role.
This principle applies directly to society as a whole. We must live righteously for the benefit of the community—and for our own personal benefit as well. For example, if I stand in line at a bus stop, others will do the same, and I can be assured that I’ll board the bus when it’s my turn. By doing so, the community is maintained, and we can all live together in harmony.
Of course, it would be ideal if people voluntarily followed the rules for the sake of the community, but in reality, without sanctions, many people are prone to pursuing immediate personal gain. That is why society ensures people live righteously, even if it means using force. We are taught morality from a young age, and laws are enacted to punish those who violate them. As a result, most people act according to their conscience and live their lives in compliance with the law. We remain quiet in libraries, do not litter on the streets, and do not break the law. Furthermore, we refrain from committing crimes and using violence to avoid legal punishment. Society has maintained the community through this education in conscience and the law, and because we have lived by these norms, this community has been able to endure to this day. Thanks to this, we can go to the library to study in peace and do not have to worry about someone stealing our property.
Of course, depending on the situation, cutting in line or freeloading might seem like an immediate benefit. However, if I cut in line or freeload, others will follow suit, and eventually, it will become difficult to maintain the community. The next time I take the bus, the people behind me will also try to cut in line, and if freeloading is taken for granted in group projects, I might end up having to handle a group project for an important course all by myself. Living righteously by following established rules is both a means of maintaining the community and a path that benefits individuals in the long run. This is because individuals can lead stable lives only when the community is sustained.
In conclusion, there are good reasons why we must live righteously by adhering to established norms as we coexist with others. Only by living righteously and following these norms can we maintain the community, and this ultimately benefits individuals as well. Even in group activities, we must choose cooperation over free-riding to ensure the group’s success and achievements. By assigning grades based on individual contributions to prevent free-riding, we can help sustain the community. The survival of the community and the virtuous lives of its members are inextricably linked; we must live virtuously for the sake of ourselves and society.
