Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Yakk
..."He knew it was against the rules", used to justify punishment, seems to me to be no justification at all. Either what was done was wrong and deserves the punishment, or it was not wrong or the punishment is excessive. ...But, how is obeying Rules just because they are Rules any more right than bowing to any other use of force or threat?
|
When one says "He knew it was against the rules", what they are really saying is "That person actively disobeyed this social contract which was made aware to all participants, and he is therefore subject to the appropriate discipline". They are just saying it in a less winded way.
No-one obeys rules "just because they are rules". Again, there is logic behind the set of behaviors, and consciously or sub-sonsciously we agree to them.
You are digging down into the deeper levels of rules and our adherence to them, and are wondering why people do not question them more often. I have had the opportunity to answer this question before, in a very structured environment of military training. I would argue that environment has more rules than any other.
When questioned by a student as to the logic behind doing something one way instead of another, a military instructor usually gets rather flustered and responds with the "I told you so, that's why" response.
When I explain the rationale, the answer is usually, "oh" or "Okay, that makes more sense now...". Unfortuantely, there are times when someone is questioning the rationale behing the rules in an inappropriate time. If the pin on the grenade is pulled, it is not the time to question the rules and discuss more efficient ways of doing things.
Yakk, I hate to say it, but sometimes "I said so" has to suffice. Even worse than that, sometimes you will not be allowed to ask the question at all, and for the sake of brevity the "Don't ask why, just fucking do it" is also implied, usually by tone of voice.