Do you think revenge is okay?

[Father Heathen]

Then a middle ground must be seeked.

A proportionate balance of action and reaction is the middle ground.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Being a submissive doormat and allowing others to walk all over you with impunity doesn't do much to stop "the cycle" either. Every bad action calls for a corrective reaction as a form of repercussion and deterrent, otherwise the behavior becomes reinforced and proliferated.

So I'm going a little each way. Revenge in and of itself is not something I could justify morally. Punitive action can have a deterrent value, or physically prevent the offender from re-offending. The moral justification in that case is deterrance rather than revenge.

 

[DallasApple]

Revenge for some can restore "integrity" .But most times it cant.Never worked for me.

 

[Me Myself]

So I'm going a little each way. Revenge in and of itself is not something I could justify morally. Punitive action can have a deterrent value, or physically prevent the offender from re-offending. The moral justification in that case is deterrance rather than revenge.

This is what I find reasonable.

Revenge in itself cannot be morally justifiable as a goal.

 

[Father Heathen]

So I'm going a little each way. Revenge in and of itself is not something I could justify morally. Punitive action can have a deterrent value, or physically prevent the offender from re-offending. The moral justification in that case is deterrance rather than revenge.

Why is gratification from a sense of vengeance necessarily immoral?

 

[Vouthon]

Being a submissive doormat and allowing others to walk all over you with impunity doesn't do much to stop "the cycle" either. Every bad action calls for a corrective reaction as a form of repercussion and deterrent, otherwise the behavior becomes reinforced and proliferated.

Consider an analogy to countries, a debate I've been having with our dear friend Lewis on another thread (and will get back too ). The Allies believed that Germany caused the Great War, so they imposed political and economic "vengeance" on her (victor's justice) - demanding that she accept sole guilt, pay heavy reparations, cede her territory and so forth (and mind I'm not actually debating the history of this which is far more complex, merely using it as an example). What happened? Did Germany "learn" not to try to dominate Europe again? Did Germany's "bad" action in being the principal cause of the catastrophic world war and its "corrective reaction" as a form of repercussion and deterrent, have a positive result?

No, the vengeance enacted by the Allies merely bred much deeper enmity and she came back worse than before. She became a monster, her hatred reinforced and proliferated and we all know what happened next.

Can we not apply this to the individual, human sphere as well - indeed more so?

I agree that a balance must be sought, yet to my mind legitimate defence against an attack is very different from inflicting further, unnecessary harm on another person simply for the sake of finding pleasure in their "disgrace" or "subjection".

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

I'm a huge fan of revenge. I don't look at it from objective moral grounds, because I don't look at anything from objective moral grounds. I do believe revenge is the truest form of justice, though. If someone kills a friend/relative of mine, it's only fair that I kill one of theirs, or the killer him/herself. And before anyone mentions the "circle of revenge"; I don't deny that person's family/friends the right to seek revenge on me either. If I were to die as a result of carrying out justice on behalf of someone close to me, I would view that as an beautiful death, and that's perfectly OK with me. I think the samurai had the right idea with bushido, which is pretty much the principles I live my life by.

 

[Vouthon]

Then a middle ground must be seeked.

And the middle ground would surely be along the lines of what Lewis said above.

A truly "corrective" approach would surely not take delight and pleasure in seeing the other person victimized and subjugated? Rather it would, I would hope, be done with goodwill towards the individual, restraint and the desire to fulfil the alleged "good end" of helping them see the error of their ways and reform, in the most "limited" way possible.

The moment one takes "pleasure" in seeing another human being suffer, and to inflict that pain with the principal aim of self-interest rather than out of a genuine desire to try and reform them, is unethical to me.

 

[Me Myself]

And the middle ground would surely be along the lines of what Lewis said above.

A truly "corrective" approach would surely not take delight and pleasure in seeing the other person victimized and subjugated? Rather it would, I would hope, be done with goodwill towards the individual, restraint and the desire to fulfil the alleged "good end" of helping them see the error of their ways and reform, in the most "limited" way possible.

The moment one takes "pleasure" in seeing another human being suffer, and to inflict that pain with the principal aim of self-interest rather than out of a genuine desire to try and reform them, is unethical to me.

I agree.

 

[Me Myself]

I'm a huge fan of revenge. I don't look at it from objective moral grounds, because I don't look at anything from objective moral grounds. I do believe revenge is the truest form of justice, though. If someone kills a friend/relative of mine, it's only fair that I kill one of theirs, or the killer him/herself. And before anyone mentions the "circle of revenge"; I don't deny that person's family/friends the right to seek revenge on me either. If I were to die as a result of carrying out justice on behalf of someone close to me, I would view that as an beautiful death, and that's perfectly OK with me. I think the samurai had the right idea with bushido, which is pretty much the principles I live my life by.

Your concept of beauty disgusts me.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

And the middle ground would surely be along the lines of what Lewis said above.

A truly "corrective" approach would surely not take delight and pleasure in seeing the other person victimized and subjugated? Rather it would, I would hope, be done with goodwill towards the individual, restraint and the desire to fulfil the alleged "good end" of helping them see the error of their ways and reform, in the most "limited" way possible.

The moment one takes "pleasure" in seeing another human being suffer, and to inflict that pain with the principal aim of self-interest rather than out of a genuine desire to try and reform them, is unethical to me.

Why should anyone make a goodwill gesture towards someone that has wronged them? I personally see it as weakness to try and reform someone who has wronged you. Ethics be damned, I'll take revenge any day.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Your concept of beauty disgusts me.

Eye of the beholder, right?

 

[Vouthon]

I think the samurai had the right idea with bushido, which is pretty much the principles I live my life by.

Have you looked at what such a warrior "code" resulted in when Japan decided to expand into Asia in the 1930s by conquering China? It was anything but "beautiful" I assure you.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

And the middle ground would surely be along the lines of what Lewis said above.

A truly "corrective" approach would surely not take delight and pleasure in seeing the other person victimized and subjugated? Rather it would, I would hope, be done with goodwill towards the individual, restraint and the desire to fulfil the alleged "good end" of helping them see the error of their ways and reform, in the most "limited" way possible.

The moment one takes "pleasure" in seeing another human being suffer, and to inflict that pain with the principal aim of self-interest rather than out of a genuine desire to try and reform them, is unethical to me.

It's not about finding pleasure in making another suffer, it's about taking pleasure in getting even, aka equal fairness.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Have you looked at what such a warrior "code" resulted in when Japan decided to expand into Asia in the 1930s by conquering China? It was anything but "beautiful" I assure you.

The samurai and bushido were no longer relevant in the 1930s... They had been wiped out by the Empire by the early 20th century. I think you need to review your history...

 

[Knight of Albion]

No-one 'gets away with it'. Karma will deliver justice, if and as warranted, in her own sweet time.

We're all human, I do understand, but revenge and the hate and anger that motivates it will only serve to drag 'you' down.

Always better to forgive if you can. Forgiveness sets two souls free...

 

[Vouthon]

The samurai and bushido were no longer relevant in the 1930s... They had been wiped out by the Empire by the early 20th century. I think you need to review your history...

Actually, in the 1930s Japanese military recruits were subjected to intensive indoctrination in the tenets of bushido and a fundamentalist interpretation of Shinto. The fact that the actual Samurai and their way of life was wiped out by the industrialization of Japan in the Meiji Restoration is quite distinct from the fact that a martial culture based upon these philosophies persisted well into the 1940s and was utilized by a militaristic government to cause untold, unnecessary human suffering.

My initial point being that the Japanese example highlights the perils of pursuing "vengeance"/"eye for an eye" to its ugly, monstrous and extreme conclusion when it transgresses all moral bounds.

I do not think that such a philosophy is a fruitful one upon which to base an individual's personal moral values and ethical framework.

 

[Me Myself]

It's not about finding pleasure in making another suffer, it's about taking pleasure in getting even, aka equal fairness.

Real fariness means everyone feels well and good.

Anything that makes this less possible is not fair.

As such, any action that goes in place with damaging someone else without it being for stopping new damage or other similar goal, is against fairness on my view.

 

[Vouthon]

It's not about finding pleasure in making another suffer, it's about taking pleasure in getting even, aka equal fairness.

And in the "getting even" the person inflicts suffering on the other person, continuing the cycle of pain started (at least I would assume in our hypothetical case) by the other person when it could have ended with that person and some good could have come from it.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The best revenge is living well. That said, revenge is a dish best served cold.