Wednesday, December 17, 2008

mOuTh a PrOvErB

ok its never good just to mouth silly platitudes/proverbs without thinking about it.

k lets give it some thought here.

"do onto others as you wud have others do onto u..."
no no no >_< no ways. its shud be
"do onto others as they do onto the world"
why??? no no am not talking about tit for tat or some crap. m serious. and am talking of just normal behaviour. why do i say this???

1. coz everyone is different. not everyone is the same. ergo everyone looks at the way differently. u still with me here ace???
2. i submit that some ppl are so different in nature in terms of their values and expectation that u wud just piss them off if u behave onto them as u expect others to behave onto u.

let me try with an example -
you are A a very serious person who likes to contemplate and B is a very frivolous person who hates to think. do u think A shud behave onto B as A sees the world?? dont u think THAT leads to conflict???
A shud behave with B as B behaves with the world. so that there is minimum conflict. aaaaaaaaaargh i can't explain this. did u get what i'm saying?? did u see??

its coz u see the world through a set of glasses and u have a standard of conduct which is right to u. prob no one on this planet shares that view. so wud they interact on ur plane of understanding or theirs. ofcourse if ur outrageously wrong someone shud correct u, but aaaaaaaaaaa ur going out of the scope of this discussion. ok let me try to explain with another example.

A is a diplomat and tactful. considers it rude to just say whats on his mind. and tries to find a subtle way to communicate his grievances. B is blunt and direct and straghtfwd and subtlety is completely lost on him. B is also annoying A about something. do u think A shud say it in the manner of A or B??
yes yes this is what i'm talking about. got it.

also YOUR silly proverb tries to create a world where everyone turns into a robot. and thinks and acts the same. its rubbish. i dont like that statement at all. and i think i shud table this conv, coz i just woke up and my BP has already gone up a few points. man i feel revved.

but next time dont give me stupid proverbs without thinking about it first.

here's another example.
A does not mind if i raid her pantry. I pefer no one raids each others larder. so shud she finish my last moon pie or not??? take a guess which one of the two options is gonna result in a black eye and a few missing teeth :P
but u see of an essence your stupid proverb does address this topic. its the centuries of mindless repeating of that proverb that has gotten us to this point of blackened teeth.. no i mean eyes.
ofcourse THAT does NOT mean A refrains from my pantry and I raid HER larder. no no :D its not that at all... though that wud be nice wudn't it???

2 comments:

  1. Hmm, interesting post. What I gather you are saying is:

    The system of ethics for each person is subjective. Each person interprets (and weighs, morally) the actions of others through the prism of her own subjective lens.

    ..I would agree that the Golden Rule is invalidated if you assume the above.


    But, can an ethical system that differs from person to person really work? In human society -
    since we interact with other humans - do we not need an OBJECTIVE (i.e., independent of the observer) system of ethics? i.e., a value framework that both parties involved in social interaction judge their (and other's) actions by.

    ..Otherwise the whole world could easily devolve into a primitive Darwinian struggle (aka "might is right").
    e.g. followers of one religion believe fervently its ok to kill non-believers - are they "right"
    or "wrong" (can't say without objective ethics).

    ..Given objective ethics, is it not fair to expect you to treat others, the way you
    expect to be treated? a.k.a the Golden Rule.


    (Hoping for a response to these ideas, no personal attacks please)

    ReplyDelete
  2. can i alteast call someone a floppy eared donkey ?? no?? sigh oh all right...
    < kidding >
    i started typing a response. turned out to be bigger than the post. basically i'll summaize in the next post.

    ReplyDelete