Where the Golden Rule Doesn't Shine

[The Sum of Awe]

What if someone were to hurt you (purposely or unawarely) while you were following the philosophy of the Golden Rule.

You need to be able to get revenge if you want people to learn not to do it again!

The way humans learn not to do this and that is kinda like dogs; we have to learn the hard way otherwise we have a large possibility we'll do it again.

If a child touches your sunburn, unaware they hurt you, you have to yell it at them, which would hurt them. That would go against the golden rule, being that you wouldn't hurt yourself.




Purposely, now I am all for peace, don't get me wrong, but we need some sort of revenge (not necessarily the same exact cause of the pain) otherwise we'll just be letting a harmful man get away with hurting you, and if you say that it's fine to let someone get away with hurting you then I won't even discuss with you, I don't respect people who don't respect themselves.

 

[Skwim]

Golden Rule (paraphrased Christian version):"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Golden Rule (My version): "Do unto others they would have you do unto them."

 

[Drolefille]

I disagree, you don't need revenge for someone to learn better. And if you're acting out of anger and vengeance then you're not trying to teach someone, you're trying to hurt someone (emotionally or physically).


Yelling at the child is done out of anger, they might learn from it, but you're lashing out. Telling the child that it hurts or grabbing their hand to stop them, calmly, is teaching them without anger.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I disagree, you don't need revenge for someone to learn better. And if you're acting out of anger and vengeance then you're not trying to teach someone, you're trying to hurt someone (emotionally or physically).


Yelling at the child is done out of anger, they might learn from it, but you're lashing out. Telling the child that it hurts or grabbing their hand to stop them, calmly, is teaching them without anger.

They wont learn from just telling them... In fact, most kids (or at least worked on me) would do it again just to find out what's going to happen next time and the next time...

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Golden Rule (paraphrased Christian version):"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Golden Rule (My version): "Do unto others they would have you do unto them."

If I am not you I am a Christian?

 

[Drolefille]

They wont learn from just telling them... In fact, most kids (or at least worked on me) would do it again just to find out what's going to happen next time and the next time...

Grabbing a hand to prevent har, or setting a punishment does not require breaking the golden rule nor acting out of anger. Harm is not required and punishment does not equal harm

 

[Breathe]

Meh. I don't see an issue with my own philosophy's view.

Do not harm the innocent. If someone harms you or the innocent, it is your duty to beat the **** out of them.

 

[Me Myself]

Grabbing a hand to prevent har, or setting a punishment does not require breaking the golden rule nor acting out of anger. Harm is not required and punishment does not equal harm

If punishment is pretty it is not punishment.

If punishment is stresful then it is harm.

Not all circumstances require harm and harm it is best avoided, but harm does tend to work in some people better than the alternative, even if only as a temporary solution.

A lot more tims most people would think though I am sure love can triumph all , eventualy

 

[jarofthoughts]

They wont learn from just telling them... In fact, most kids (or at least worked on me) would do it again just to find out what's going to happen next time and the next time...

Perhaps you're just not very good with kids...

As someone who does this kind of thing for a living I find that kids are often very willing to learn and will accept explanations for why the things they do are wrong much more readily than they would being yelled at.
In short, a proper honest and calm explanation is generally much more efficient.

And this falls well within the realm of the Golden Rule.
If I do something wrong I would like to have someone explain it to me so that I can learn to do it right, or, at least avoid doing wrong.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You need to be able to get revenge if you want people to learn not to do it again! The way humans learn not to do this and that is kinda like dogs; we have to learn the hard way otherwise we have a large possibility we'll do it again. If a child touches your sunburn, unaware they hurt you, you have to yell it at them, which would hurt them. That would go against the golden rule, being that you wouldn't hurt yourself.

I hope you rethink this before having children.

 

[Drolefille]

If punishment is pretty it is not punishment.

If punishment is stresful then it is harm.

Not all circumstances require harm and harm it is best avoided, but harm does tend to work in some people better than the alternative, even if only as a temporary solution.

A lot more tims most people would think though I am sure love can triumph all , eventualy

If harm is necessary than it should be minimized, in the ideal situation of course. Considered stress with a purpose is not the same as inspiring fear and anger for example. Reasonable punishments might result in stress, but generally are constructive, with a purpose, and age/situation appropriate. If down out of anger, or out of revenge then they're not going to fit those criteria.

I'm realistic in thinking that someone's going to yell at their kid out of surprise and pain because the kid stomps on their foot. That just doesn't make it the ideal, following the Golden Rule, response. (Since that is being considered the ideal for the purposes of this thread.) I'm disagreeing with giving someone an 'out' under the pretense of something being necessary that isn't.

 

[Averroes]

Hmmm interesting thread.

"Is revenge acceptable because its excusable?"

In other words, if I am harmed in an unprovoked situation are my violent actions in return, acceptable?

 

[Me Myself]

If harm is necessary than it should be minimized, in the ideal situation of course. Considered stress with a purpose is not the same as inspiring fear and anger for example. Reasonable punishments might result in stress, but generally are constructive, with a purpose, and age/situation appropriate. If down out of anger, or out of revenge then they're not going to fit those criteria.

I'm realistic in thinking that someone's going to yell at their kid out of surprise and pain because the kid stomps on their foot. That just doesn't make it the ideal, following the Golden Rule, response. (Since that is being considered the ideal for the purposes of this thread.) I'm disagreeing with giving someone an 'out' under the pretense of something being necessary that isn't.

I do believe that punishments are best dealt when one is not overfilled with anger or such an emotion. In general, anger clouds judgement.

I wouldn´t call punishment "revenge" neither, but conceptualizations may vary.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I do believe that punishments are best dealt when one is not overfilled with anger or such an emotion. In general, anger clouds judgement.

I wouldn´t call punishment "revenge" neither, but conceptualizations may vary.

Our behavioural patterns are generally influenced by various types of positive and negative reinforcements, and while negative reinforcement is useful for setting boundaries and deterring certain types of behaviour, positive reinforcement is the most effective in the long run.
When raising/educating a child both should be used with care and consideration to their effect, and while some might think that restrictions and rules might hamper a childs development, this is not accurate.
Rather, a child who has reasonable rules and boundaries around them, set in place by caring adults, will feel safer and, in fact, more free as a result.
The same is, to a certain degree, true for adults.
While capable of more autonomy, adults also respond better to clear and logical boundaries, both in their relationships with other people, in the work environment, and in society in general.
This may sound overly simplistic and obvious, but it is worth taking into account when discussing these matters as perhaps the worst thing you can do in these situations is display arbitrary and irregular responses, meaning that consistency must be at the core of our considerations.

 

[Averroes]

I do believe that punishments are best dealt when one is not overfilled with anger or such an emotion. In general, anger clouds judgement.

I wouldn´t call punishment "revenge" neither, but conceptualizations may vary.

Well doesn't the American justice system's form of punishment considered retribution? Do we not consider the death penalty or imprisonment justice a form of revenge?

 

[Me Myself]

Our behavioural patterns are generally influenced by various types of positive and negative reinforcements, and while negative reinforcement is useful for setting boundaries and deterring certain types of behaviour, positive reinforcement is the most effective in the long run.
When raising/educating a child both should be used with care and consideration to their effect, and while some might think that restrictions and rules might hamper a childs development, this is not accurate.
Rather, a child who has reasonable rules and boundaries around them, set in place by caring adults, will feel safer and, in fact, more free as a result.
The same is, to a certain degree, true for adults.
While capable of more autonomy, adults also respond better to clear and logical boundaries, both in their relationships with other people, in the work environment, and in society in general.
This may sound overly simplistic and obvious, but it is worth taking into account when discussing these matters as perhaps the worst thing you can do in these situations is display arbitrary and irregular responses, meaning that consistency must be at the core of our considerations.

Sounds like a very lucid response all around

 

[SageTree]

What if someone were to hurt you (purposely or unawarely) while you were following the philosophy of the Golden Rule.

You need to be able to get revenge if you want people to learn not to do it again!

The way humans learn not to do this and that is kinda like dogs; we have to learn the hard way otherwise we have a large possibility we'll do it again.

If a child touches your sunburn, unaware they hurt you, you have to yell it at them, which would hurt them. That would go against the golden rule, being that you wouldn't hurt yourself.




Purposely, now I am all for peace, don't get me wrong, but we need some sort of revenge (not necessarily the same exact cause of the pain) otherwise we'll just be letting a harmful man get away with hurting you, and if you say that it's fine to let someone get away with hurting you then I won't even discuss with you, I don't respect people who don't respect themselves.

I MIGHT be Toasting in a Roll Thread, but I'm not sure.

I take a different tune on the necessity that I NEED to 'get revenge', since 'revenge' implies, to me, some violence or anger in the action.

And I disagree that the 'hard way' is how people learn effectively.

Metaphor:

There is a story of a man who tried for months to get his dog to take his medicine. He wrestled with the dog every day to make him take it.
One day the bottle broke, the man was very angry.
But the dog instead of running away, went over to lick up the medicine.

The medicine is the dog needed to be healthy, but it wasn't being applied to the 'student' correctly.





Maybe the course of your life shows otherwise.
But these are very much against what I feel is 'right' for me and how I apply the golden rule.




"Hatred doesn't cease by Hatred, but by Love, this is an Eternal Law"



I think you reap what you sow, so unless you LIKE to get yelled at or 'revenge' taken on you, I wouldn't recommend doing it either, I personally do not.

I try to create love and peace with my actions and it does surround me.

:namaste
SageTree


(hope that answer was 'good' enough to get a comment from you SOA?)

 

[Falvlun]

*Makes a mental note not to touch Sum's sunburn.

 

[SageTree]

fureal....

 

[DreadFish]

What if someone were to hurt you (purposely or unawarely) while you were following the philosophy of the Golden Rule.

You need to be able to get revenge if you want people to learn not to do it again!

The way humans learn not to do this and that is kinda like dogs; we have to learn the hard way otherwise we have a large possibility we'll do it again.

If a child touches your sunburn, unaware they hurt you, you have to yell it at them, which would hurt them. That would go against the golden rule, being that you wouldn't hurt yourself.




Purposely, now I am all for peace, don't get me wrong, but we need some sort of revenge (not necessarily the same exact cause of the pain) otherwise we'll just be letting a harmful man get away with hurting you, and if you say that it's fine to let someone get away with hurting you then I won't even discuss with you, I don't respect people who don't respect themselves.

I think you are approaching it from the wrong direction. Now, its not revenge to discipline someone for doing something harmful. It's simply getting their attention, and letting them know in a way they would remember. Such correction would differ, depending on the situation. Correction does not always have to be aggressive or corporal.


Now, wouldn't you like it to be brought to your attention when you have done something wrong?

Certain measures work in certain situations. Its the intention that makes the difference.