Free Speech & Right to Privacy/Libel/etc (more fun with PZ!)

[Cormac]

Karma?

Doesn't sound like you're envisioning something that plays out over multiple lifetimes.

That isn't what I meant by karma. Given who we are, it's fairly safe to say that this is a secular karma: people are treated as they treat others.

I'm not a fan of eye for an eye, generally.

Me neither, the saying goes - an eye for an eye will make us all blind.

[Robert_S]

Karma?

Doesn't sound like you're envisioning something that plays out over multiple lifetimes.

That isn't what I meant by karma. Given who we are, it's fairly safe to say that this is a secular karma: people are treated as they treat others.

I'm not a fan of eye for an eye, generally.

Me neither, the saying goes - an eye for an eye will make us all blind.

Not exactly. It would leave a few one eyed people walking around being a lot more careful with the pointy sticks lest they lose the other eye. It's an improvement on retaliation with escalations leading to generations long feuds.

[hadespussercats]

Karma?

Doesn't sound like you're envisioning something that plays out over multiple lifetimes.

That isn't what I meant by karma. Given who we are, it's fairly safe to say that this is a secular karma: people are treated as they treat others.

I'm not a fan of eye for an eye, generally.

Me neither, the saying goes - an eye for an eye will make us all blind.

Not exactly. It would leave a few one eyed people walking around being a lot more careful with the pointy sticks lest they lose the other eye. It's an improvement on retaliation with escalations leading to generations long feuds.

Well, properly speaking, I poke out your eye, you poke out mine, I poke out yours for poking out mine, and you flail around, maybe succeeding in poking out my last eye if you're lucky...

Either way, not so great.

[Cormac]

Not exactly. It would leave a few one eyed people walking around being a lot more careful with the pointy sticks lest they lose the other eye. It's an improvement on retaliation with escalations leading to generations long feuds.

Well, properly speaking, I poke out your eye, you poke out mine, I poke out yours for poking out mine, and you flail around, maybe succeeding in poking out my last eye if you're lucky...

Either way, not so great.

But then some family member of yours sees this, and the does it for you and then the vendetta starts.

[Red Celt]

Well, properly speaking, I poke out your eye, you poke out mine, I poke out yours for poking out mine, and you flail around, maybe succeeding in poking out my last eye if you're lucky...

Either way, not so great.

Or, 2 people with only 1 eye each are much more careful about how they act.

If you're not in favour of treating people the way that they treat others, then you're not in favour of justice. We may as well close down all of the law courts. Wouldn't want people to live with the consequences of their actions, eh? That is exactly what I do, but on a personal level. And it isn't the same as a vendetta... hatchets should always be buried when behaviours are changed.

[Cormac]

Well, properly speaking, I poke out your eye, you poke out mine, I poke out yours for poking out mine, and you flail around, maybe succeeding in poking out my last eye if you're lucky...

Either way, not so great.

Or, 2 people with only 1 eye each are much more careful about how they act.

If you're not in favour of treating people the way that they treat others, then you're not in favour of justice. We may as well close down all of the law courts. Wouldn't want people to live with the consequences of their actions, eh? That is exactly what I do, but on a personal level. And it isn't the same as a vendetta... hatchets should always be buried when behaviours are changed.

Except, they don't. What you have are two people still equally convinced the they were right and the other wrong. The difference is that now they're predisposed to violent response.

It is for this reason we stopped allowing people to "dispense justice" themselves.

[Red Celt]

Except, they don't. What you have are two people still equally convinced the they were right and the other wrong. The difference is that now they're predisposed to violent response.

It is for this reason we stopped allowing people to "dispense justice" themselves.

It isn't about people thinking that they're right or wrong, it's about social behaviour. Having a 3rd party police your every decision on a day to day basis? That's nonsensical.

What's your alternative to an eye for an eye? Turn the other cheek? Bad behaviour receives no negative reaction, therefore bad behaviour continues unabated. As an ethical system that can never work. Shitty people would prosper and "good" people would be walked over. The world of the bully, triumphant.

[Robert_S]

Except, they don't. What you have are two people still equally convinced the they were right and the other wrong. The difference is that now they're predisposed to violent response.

It is for this reason we stopped allowing people to "dispense justice" themselves.

It isn't about people thinking that they're right or wrong, it's about social behaviour. Having a 3rd party police your every decision on a day to day basis? That's nonsensical.

What's your alternative to an eye for an eye? Turn the other cheek? Bad behaviour receives no negative reaction, therefore bad behaviour continues unabated. As an ethical system that can never work. Shitty people would prosper and "good" people would be walked over. The world of the bully, triumphant.

Ah, but there's the question of who gets to decide what's "good" and "bad". The alternative to "eye for an eye" that we have here consists of the rules, the report button, reminders, warnings and eventually a break from the forum to cool off.

If you feel strongly that our set of rules needs improvement, feel free to start a thread in In Depth. Bear in mind though that there are ways to exploit the rules for whatever ruleset you may think of.

[Red Celt]

Except, they don't. What you have are two people still equally convinced the they were right and the other wrong. The difference is that now they're predisposed to violent response.

It is for this reason we stopped allowing people to "dispense justice" themselves.

It isn't about people thinking that they're right or wrong, it's about social behaviour. Having a 3rd party police your every decision on a day to day basis? That's nonsensical.

What's your alternative to an eye for an eye? Turn the other cheek? Bad behaviour receives no negative reaction, therefore bad behaviour continues unabated. As an ethical system that can never work. Shitty people would prosper and "good" people would be walked over. The world of the bully, triumphant.

Ah, but there's the question of who gets to decide what's "good" and "bad". The alternative to "eye for an eye" that we have here consists of the rules, the report button, reminders, warnings and eventually a break from the forum to cool off.

If you feel strongly that our set of rules needs improvement, feel free to start a thread in In Depth. Bear in mind though that there are ways to exploit the rules for whatever ruleset you may think of.

Well, I wasn't on about the forum; I was on about the actual world, on a day to day basis. I've already said that my personal rules sometimes don't coincide with forum rules. I have to live with that. It's a compromise. I'm not heavily motivated to try and get the forum rules changed... as it is a close-enough match.

On the plus side... finally... in this case, both parties were told they were in the wrong. The antagonising part was when that had previously been applied only to one of them (me).

[hadespussercats]

Well, properly speaking, I poke out your eye, you poke out mine, I poke out yours for poking out mine, and you flail around, maybe succeeding in poking out my last eye if you're lucky...

Either way, not so great.

Or, 2 people with only 1 eye each are much more careful about how they act.

If you're not in favour of treating people the way that they treat others, then you're not in favour of justice. We may as well close down all of the law courts. Wouldn't want people to live with the consequences of their actions, eh? That is exactly what I do, but on a personal level. And it isn't the same as a vendetta... hatchets should always be buried when behaviours are changed.

Justice doesn't require that one party be treated the way he or she treated another. And our laws reflect that good sense.

There can be consequences for wrong actions that don't mimic wrong actions. In fact-- I'd hope those consequences wouldn't mimic wrong actions, because if they do, where do we get the idea those actions were wrong in the first place? I'd rather our laws not stoop to the lowest common denominator.

[Cormac]

Except, they don't. What you have are two people still equally convinced the they were right and the other wrong. The difference is that now they're predisposed to violent response.

It is for this reason we stopped allowing people to "dispense justice" themselves.

It isn't about people thinking that they're right or wrong, it's about social behaviour. Having a 3rd party police your every decision on a day to day basis? That's nonsensical.

What's your alternative to an eye for an eye? Turn the other cheek? Bad behaviour receives no negative reaction, therefore bad behaviour continues unabated. As an ethical system that can never work. Shitty people would prosper and "good" people would be walked over. The world of the bully, triumphant.

An eye for an eye is EXACTLY the cultural behaviour that embeds vendetta.

This is why societies usually arrive at the idea that it is better to make it illegal for people to take this action themselves, and instead reserve this to the state. Primarily because it is rare that the consequences in the alternative are very rarely limited to the two parties involved.

So both parties know that if they act outside the limits prescribed by them and their fellow citizens, that they will be punished. Third parties don't police your behaviour. They examine the facts, and if they find that your behaviour in a given interaction transgressed what is permissible, then you may be punished under the law.

This is why law and order is a central component of civilisation.

[Red Celt]

It isn't about legal matters. I've been talking about sub-law issues... as in, how people treat other people on a daily basis (without breaking any laws). And tit-for-tat is a short-hand phrase I've been using - it only goes to a vendetta when it is done to destruction, i.e. taken too far. So, stupidity aside, that isn't an issue. Vendettas don't allow for apologies, redemption or an easing of hostilities.

As for how laws handle justice, any law that doesn't punish a criminal to the degree that the criminal punished others... is an act of injustice. Sometimes, justice is impossible*, but when it's possible... it should be carried out.


* If you murder 2 people, you can't be killed twice.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Or, 2 people with only 1 eye each are much more careful about how they act.

But three people with one eye make a great plot device oracle.

[Cormac]

It isn't about legal matters. I've been talking about sub-law issues... as in, how people treat other people on a daily basis (without breaking any laws). And tit-for-tat is a short-hand phrase I've been using - it only goes to a vendetta when it is done to destruction, i.e. taken too far. So, stupidity aside, that isn't an issue. Vendettas don't allow for apologies, redemption or an easing of hostilities.

As for how laws handle justice, any law that doesn't punish a criminal to the degree that the criminal punished others... is an act of injustice. Sometimes, justice is impossible*, but when it's possible... it should be carried out.


* If you murder 2 people, you can't be killed twice.

The same principles apply.

There is a great deal of sense in "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" as opposed to "do unto others AS they do unto you".

[Cormac]

Or, 2 people with only 1 eye each are much more careful about how they act.

But three people with one eye make a great plot device oracle.

Also, a great scene in a movie.