Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Yakk · 08-10-2005, 07:41 AM

I can't help but notice that people put alot of stock in rules.

Comments like "they saw the rule, and broke it. So they deserve the punishment." aren't all that rare.

The thing is, I don't understand it. If the rule is a good rule, and breaking it caused harm, and the punishment is appropriate, then sure. But this has nothing, to me, to do with the rule: if someone did harm, and they are appropriately punished, then the punishment is justified.

I have difficulty understanding why the existance of the Rule justifies anything.

Rules, to me, are at most communication. At best, they are a form of speech by those with power, saying what they consider wrong and how they will respond.

There is some utility to such communication, at least for the setter of the rules. It magnifies the power of those with power, because instead of being forced to use their power to influence behaviour, they can use the threat of their power to influence behaviour. If you make it clear that "if you cross this line, we will shoot you", you will have to use fewer bullets than if you just shoot everyone who crosses the line.

I realize that people think differently, sometimes to a great extent. So I'm wondering what other people think about this.

Are Rules, themselves, important to you? Does the existance of a Rule justify the punishment in any way, or make the act that violates the Rule any more wrong?

PS: This could be moved to any of Politics, Philosophy or Living.

08-10-2005, 07:41 AM	#1 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	Rules? I can't help but notice that people put alot of stock in rules. Comments like "they saw the rule, and broke it. So they deserve the punishment." aren't all that rare. The thing is, I don't understand it. If the rule is a good rule, and breaking it caused harm, and the punishment is appropriate, then sure. But this has nothing, to me, to do with the rule: if someone did harm, and they are appropriately punished, then the punishment is justified. I have difficulty understanding why the existance of the Rule justifies anything. Rules, to me, are at most communication. At best, they are a form of speech by those with power, saying what they consider wrong and how they will respond. There is some utility to such communication, at least for the setter of the rules. It magnifies the power of those with power, because instead of being forced to use their power to influence behaviour, they can use the threat of their power to influence behaviour. If you make it clear that "if you cross this line, we will shoot you", you will have to use fewer bullets than if you just shoot everyone who crosses the line. I realize that people think differently, sometimes to a great extent. So I'm wondering what other people think about this. Are Rules, themselves, important to you? Does the existance of a Rule justify the punishment in any way, or make the act that violates the Rule any more wrong? PS: This could be moved to any of Politics, Philosophy or Living. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.