A classless society with a sense of innate justice would probably have to propagate fair morality using similar parables - the abstract concept of justice on its own doesn't seem to be enough to do the job.
But Mig's point was that his son had quickly learned to generalize the concept of fairness, a very basic and useful one (to defend one's rights and needs) apparently without the need for parables. We don't just learn "the abstract concept of justice" in isolation, we learn it through noting its applications in use in a "form of life" and generalising from them - cf Wittgenstein:
" ... the term `language-game' is meant to bring into prominence the fact that the speaking of language is part of an activity, or of a form of life" (PI 23). What enables language to function and therefore must be accepted as "given" is precisely forms of life. In Wittgenstein's terms, agreement is required "not only in definitions but also (queer as this may sound) in judgments" (PI 242), and this is "not agreement in opinions but in form of life" (PI 241). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/#Lan
" ... the term `language-game' is meant to bring into prominence the fact that the speaking of language is part of an activity, or of a form of life" (PI 23). What enables language to function and therefore must be accepted as "given" is precisely forms of life. In Wittgenstein's terms, agreement is required "not only in definitions but also (queer as this may sound) in judgments" (PI 242), and this is "not agreement in opinions but in form of life" (PI 241).
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/#Lan
This also reflects Chomsky's view about human creativity and the use of language (against the behaviourist view) discussed in the debate:
But when I speak of creativity, I'm not attributing to the concept the notion of value that is normal when we speak of creativity. That is, when you speak of scientific creativity, you're speaking, properly, of the achievements of a Newton. But in the context in which I have been speaking about creativity, it's a normal human act. I'm speaking of the kind of creativity that any child demonstrates when he's able to come to grips with a new situation: to describe it properly, react to it properly, tell one something about it, think about it in a new fashion for him and so on. I think it's appropriate to call those acts creative, but of course without thinking of those acts as being the acts of a Newton. In fact it may very well be true that creativity in the arts or the sciences, that which goes beyond the normal, may really involve properties of, well, I would also say of human nature, which may not exist fully developed in the mass of mankind, and may not constitute part of the normal creativity of everyday life. http://www.chomsky.info/debates/1971xxxx.htm
I'm speaking of the kind of creativity that any child demonstrates when he's able to come to grips with a new situation: to describe it properly, react to it properly, tell one something about it, think about it in a new fashion for him and so on. I think it's appropriate to call those acts creative, but of course without thinking of those acts as being the acts of a Newton.
In fact it may very well be true that creativity in the arts or the sciences, that which goes beyond the normal, may really involve properties of, well, I would also say of human nature, which may not exist fully developed in the mass of mankind, and may not constitute part of the normal creativity of everyday life.
http://www.chomsky.info/debates/1971xxxx.htm
While some ideas might well need parables to reinforce them, fairness is clearly important for our self-defence - as with Mig's son and his rights. But accepting it entails that we acknowledge the rights of others too. So there is less need for reinforcement of this basic "language game" in any human "form of life". Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
The parables are there to reinforce and condition behaviour, not to teach it in the first place.
Parables are trite, but their social effect isn't trivial - it's interesting how many of the persuasive emails that wingers send out are framed as parables. Self-help and motivational guides rely heavily on them too. For example:
LiveLeak.com - About Socialism...
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly. One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & the ad More..dition of more government welfare programs. Based on the lectures that she had participated in and the occasional chat with a professor she felt that for years her father had obviously harbored an evil, even selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school. She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she studied all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum. Her father listened and then asked, "How is your good friend Mary doing?" She replied, "Mary is barely getting by." She continued, "She barely has a 2.0 GPA," adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies. "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over." Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA. The daughter visibly shocked by her father's suggestion angrily fired back, that wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!" The father slowly smiled, winked and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party"
This is a non sequitur as an objective argument, but narrative logic is much looser - which is why you can get away with this kind of twisty rhetoric and still appear persuasive.
It also carries at least two moral payloads. One is that you don't share hard work, and the other is that socialists are irresponsible and immature party people. They're not serious, self-sacrificing and adult, and don't understand why hard work matters. (And they'll probably want a bail-out at some point.)
If you're not inclined to critical thinking, I suspect it's quite effective - or at least more effective than (say) a graph pointing out that GDP rises under Democratic presidents and falls under Republican ones. Or that you'll be $476 better off under Obama's tax plan than McCain's.
