The trend
What is a vice? And what isn’t? That all depends. According to common wisdom, a vice is a behavior that, if not done in moderation, is damaging to ourselves or to others. A description that depends on myriad factors: the moral principles that we consider ironclad, our life experiences and those of the people around us, religious beliefs, the socio-cultural context, the set of knowledge we possess to predict the effects of a given behavior, and many more.
Now because of the influence of all these variables, individual perceptions of what constitutes a vice vary from one social-cultural context to another. This explains why there is a wide range of opinions in the world on legalizing recreational drugs, for example, or alcohol consumption among young people or gambling.
These opinions are susceptible to change over time, even very abrupt change, within the same social context. What is generally considered unseemly today might not be seen as such in the immediate future. So the stigmatization of an activity or practice might dissipate with the emergence of more tolerant attitudes which come about in the wake of new laws, new scientific breakthroughs, or economic-political assessments. Likewise, habits or behaviors till yesterday thought of as virtuous may suddenly be deemed dangerous vices for society today.
IPSOS provides an overview of the kaleidoscope of perceptions on vices in the world in this recent report: Global Views on Vices. The study was run on a sample of 27 countries, often with a vast array of traditions and cultures: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Malesia, Mexico, Peru, Poland, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and the United States.
To what extent are certain sensitive behaviors socially acceptable in these countries? In other words, in what contexts is a given behavior regarded as permissible because it causes no damage to either the individual or the community?
Generally speaking, people in all the countries in the study had no objections to eating chocolate or packaged snacks, or drinking soft drinks. But opinions differed widely on alcohol consumption. In fact, 62% of interviewees said they were in favor of consuming wine in moderation, and 61% said the same about beer. But a closer look at individual country data is revealing: in Malesia, for example, only one in four approve of alcohol consumption; in India, Turkey and Japan approval is expressed by less than half. And differences are even more marked with regard to drinking liquor, even in moderation. An explanation for this finding might lie in religious dictates that rigidly regulate what people can eat and drink in some cases; in others deep-seated moral principles in some societies might stigmatize the loss of self-awareness or self-control.
Turning to other topics, as far as the unrestricted consumption of pornography, the most open-minded people in the survey are the British (42% in favor) and the Belgians (41%). But the overall average in favor stands at 29%, with 43% against. The Japanese express the strongest aversion to online dating services (with only 14% in favor, compared to 69% in Sweden) and anti-social media (36% versus an average of 65%). There is widespread worldwide condemnation of tobacco use, electronic cigarettes and gambling; 46% of interviewees also disapprove of violent videogames.
Key takeaways
Recreational use of marijuana was seen as morally objectionable by 51% of interviewees (with 28% in favor). But here too the divergence from country to country was remarkable. In Canada and the US, 51% were in favor, while Japan was in last place with only 6%. In contrast, Turkey recorded the highest number of people against at 80%; Italy ranks mid-range with 30% for and 44% against recreational use of marijuana.
The argument often justifying this continued widespread diffidence is that marijuana represents a slippery slope. The thinking is that although cannabis use in moderation does not seem dangerous, legalization could eventually lead to the abuse of hard drugs; from here the need to censure a practice that would indirectly trigger unacceptable consequences for society. But now we know that this line of reasoning is biased. Marijuana is not a gateway drug leading to hard drugs; what’s more, banning the use of cannabis does not eliminate drug addiction. In contrast, what emerges in the Ipsos report is a general awareness of the possible benefits of this substance: 55% recognize the therapeutic benefits and 57% said they approved of medical marijuana. In addition, 55% are convinced that it will be legalized for therapeutic purposes at some point in the next ten years.
It’s still too early to say that an open mentality toward the use of this substance is becoming the norm. But two examples help us understand how certain social stigmas have disappeared, and how the evolution of collective behaviors can be influenced by legislative initiatives, with ripple effects on the economy as well.
In recent decades, Canada and some states in the US have legalized marijuana for medical and recreational purposes. In fact, a recent issue of the IPSOS magazine covered this trend: WTF-What the future . This study reveals that moral, religious and cultural objections, which until just a few years ago thwarted the use of cannabis, are gradually giving way to more open and informed attitudes. What’s more, interest among Canadians and North Americans in cannabis CBS (or light marijuana) and THC is gradually opening up sizeable market share linked to more traditional sectors, such as the entertainment and restaurant industries, as well as agriculture and medical research. As far as funding, if the competent government agencies stop classing cannabis as a narcotic, this could open lines of credit for producers and anyone interested in opening a “weed shop,” giving powerful impetus to retail distribution.
This shows how an informed assessment with regard to whether a behavior is a vice depends not only on the moral principles and the socio-cultural context in question, but also – and more importantly – on accurate knowledge of the positive and negative effects of our actions. What looks like a vice where ignorance reigns may well prove to be a virtue when our opinions are backed up by on adequate understanding.
