Why should I act logical and virtuous when everyone else is not?

[Drvladivostok]

The Golden Rule seems to be so hard to apply if you are discriminated and oppresed constantly and your actions are not reciprocated, if someone is bullying you for the emotional rewards how do you justify acting logically with a force that is not logical, why shouldn't you just fucking kill him for the emotional reward? Because your action might lead to consequence which decrease your emotional well being right? Well what if his action of illogicality (Is that even a word?) is not punished? Why does he have the right to act upon his desire, ignor logic, do harmful action on others and not be prosecuted for it? Why should you have the obligation to do virtues and logical action then? Then the logical action for society is for you to reciprocate his action so that some flaws in the system are mitigated and some asshole bullies go six feet under right? This is bassically why we love vigelantees so much.

So even if your action brings you adverse effect it could be positive precedent to everyone else on how to clean up where the justice system have failed, therefore it would bring a net positive effect for society.

Then what should the principle of action which the society adhere to? Since you don't have to have moral instinct if not reciprocated againts then how do you fix a society where everyone is an asshole to eachother.

This is why I find the 'turning the other cheeck' to be idealistic but not applicable, in Islamic Ideology when your life or well being is in danger you can toss all that morality crap to the bin for a moment until things fo back to normal. Ofcourse the problem is the relative circumstance of when you can interlude the rules, this can also be a source of problem, evil people using this justification to do evil.

 

[ZenRaiden]

You should not.

 

[Daddy]

I don't know. I just try to be fair with people as much as possible, because in my mind, if I can't even do that, then I can't expect them to be fair to me; and I would like to encourage fairness as much as possible. But should anyone else be like this? Only if they value what I value and I guess those are the people I'm really trying to influence in the end. Not the others.

 

[Puffy]

What other people do is their business, we can’t change other people. So it’s a question of being true to our own integrity, whatever that has to say. That’s how to feel self-respect, in being true to our values and what we feel is right.

 

[birdsnestfern]

It may mean you aren't in the right tribe or group too. Consider where a better group of more like minded people might be and if you can relocate if that would help.

It depends on the circumstance too. If its happening at work, then the first thing is to tell the person you do not like or want that behavior to his face. (IF you think its safe to say that). If you don't think its safe, then go to the supervisor and immediately tell them what happened and that you don't want it to happen again and if it does, you will go to the next level higher. (Again, only if you feel its safe and the environment isn't hostile against you). If you still feel a hostile environment, you might be best to leave that job and find another group/job.

If its at home, if you are nice and say nothing, it depends on how strongly you feel & your sense of fairness. Don't put up with it if its really making you feel bad. But ask if you are over reacting too, and journalize it and wait a day to figure it out. Find a way to escape it if still bothers you days later. Otherwise, It usually keeps getting worse and worse. Take notes, keep dates of what happened on a log, photograph incidents, record things and report it if you have backup.

If its not that hostile, but its more like everyone else is a team and they are leaving you out, I don't know, it depends on if you need to stay for an income and how bad it is. But find a way to express what you feel after a day or two of assimilating it.

Always feel things out though, if you sense its not safe to express things, then don't. Soul search and figure out if that group or subject is a good match or not and change if it isn't.

 

[Hadoblado]

People do what they deem best for their interests. Virtue and logic are just tools for facilitating those interests.

But they are tools that can serve your interests too.

Who you are to other people is based on how you act, and you get different opportunities based on who people perceive you to be.

In some circles, being perceived as strong is more important than being perceived as virtuous or logical. If you are being bullied, no amount of virtue is going to empower you, and no amount of logic will stop it. They are extracting from you and will do so until they fail to get anything out of it or they find a juicer target.

But virtue and logic, depending on how you define these things, can help you. If you have social support, there is a cost to bullies for bullying you: They are looked down on the people you are friends with. So even if virtue and logic don't work on the bully, they can help to manufacture a social environment in which it is not in the bully's best interest to bully you.

I don't know how old you are, but I haven't seen any bullying at university ever. It's just not in anyone's best interest to do - they'll get called out for it.

 

[PiedPiper]

The Golden Rule seems to be so hard to apply if you are discriminated and oppresed constantly and your actions are not reciprocated, if someone is bullying you for the emotional rewards how do you justify acting logically with a force that is not logical, why shouldn't you just fucking kill him for the emotional reward? Because your action might lead to consequence which decrease your emotional well being right? Well what if his action of illogicality (Is that even a word?) is not punished? Why does he have the right to act upon his desire, ignor logic, do harmful action on others and not be prosecuted for it? Why should you have the obligation to do virtues and logical action then? Then the logical action for society is for you to reciprocate his action so that some flaws in the system are mitigated and some asshole bullies go six feet under right? This is bassically why we love vigelantees so much.

So even if your action brings you adverse effect it could be positive precedent to everyone else on how to clean up where the justice system have failed, therefore it would bring a net positive effect for society.

Then what should the principle of action which the society adhere to? Since you don't have to have moral instinct if not reciprocated againts then how do you fix a society where everyone is an asshole to eachother.

This is why I find the 'turning the other cheeck' to be idealistic but not applicable, in Islamic Ideology when your life or well being is in danger you can toss all that morality crap to the bin for a moment until things fo back to normal. Ofcourse the problem is the relative circumstance of when you can interlude the rules, this can also be a source of problem, evil people using this justification to do evil.

The justice system placed itself a monument and invited awe from spectators. The people stood in its glory, basking upon it's radiant splendor. "What a thing" one man says, as his eyes fixate on one of the monuments arms, completely unaware of the pickpocket behind him. "And now we don't need to protect ourselves..." another woman murmurs, as her vehicle rolls softly away, a hooded figure gripping its wheel. "They have our back", says an older gentleman, beaming a smile at the blues. From afar the wailing of sirens howl acrost the night, promising safety and justice. And the people believe it, they believe it because being a sheep is easier.

I wonder what has to be compromised to be an upstanding citizen. I question the nature of man to so blindly place trust in an organization for the sake of power. Who gets to decide where people can move and cant. If sleeping in your car is unacceptable, if dressing different makes you a public nuisance, if standing up for yourself is a crime. There is so much wrong with the justice system we could write essay upon essay and still never reach the bottom of the iceburg. And yet we rely on it solely. There is something not right about it...

If 'anonymous' witnesses a crime, and says nothing about it, or tries to fix it themselves, 'anonymous' is now the criminal. Not because he committed a crime but because he didn't act on the rules of society to address that crime. He acted AS the law. If girl A is in an abusive relationship and on drugs, and she calls the cops, but when the cops arrive the other partner is gone, she will be arrested for drug use. Even if she has visible bruises. If a man is being threatened by a woman and snaps, is driven to a state of fight or flight, the man will be charged for whatever action he takes, none of his reasons will make a difference. Something is very wrong here...

You'd turn the other way or watch someone get bullied but you'd not fail to spew hatred for the one who turns and fights back. You don't really want to know what drives people to do the things they do, you want quick revenge. Have you noticed the world is more violent than ever? Have you taken into account the circumstances that led up to it? Do you even care. When people say they have empathy I almost laugh, no, you mean you have selective empathy, which means you see a very small picture. Our society has a strict tolerance on this, where others may allow more wiggle room. In some societies it's 'expected' to destroy the person who did you or your family great wrong. Should you punish a crime with another crime? Well that all depends on your definition of crime, and the details surrounding it.

Technically the human soul was never meant to be confined within the walls of a jail cell, it not only destroys the body, but the mind. So, jail is a crime. If we are defining 'crime' by any physical, or mental distress we intentionally put another human being in. This is where it gets tricky, because the law is what defines a crime in our society. If the law deems it acceptable, it no longer becomes a crime. So really, what is morality? In the end humans only ever act out of their own self interest, so, no matter what the law says, there is always going to be an inner direction we plant for ourselves. You don't have obligation, you're the only one who places those obligations up for yourself. Know thyself.

 

[dr froyd]

that's the whole point of virtue ethics - that you act based on values, independently of the acts of others, and independently utilitarian calculations.

your idea looks more like making utilitarian excuses for purely hedonistic ethics

 

[ZenRaiden]

Vir is man. Virtuous translates to mannly or humanly.

 

[Geauvoir]

The question is why are you letting your behavior be dictated by the actions of other people? What most other people do should not be a factor in how you choose to respond to situations. I'm not saying that you must be logical or virtuous, just to choose whether or not you want to be on your own terms.

 

[BurnedOut]

People do what they deem best for their interests. Virtue and logic are just tools for facilitating those interests.

And this scientifically now. Logic is a means to an end and not to truth.

On the other hand, you can learn from buddhism - rising above your desires. When drama and money lose priority, you will learn the secret of happiness - acceptance, love, kindness, empathy.

You cannot change the other person. But you can nullify their existence based on their lack of a soul.

 

[Drvladivostok]

What most other people do should not be a factor in how you choose to respond to situations.

Of course one's action should be dictated by actions of reactions of others, I shouldn't be able to shoot a guy I don't like regardless of how much I desire to, because it won't be to my or others well being, the golden indicator is utilitarianism, but it's hard to lift your end of the bargain when others don't.

 

[Geauvoir]

What most other people do should not be a factor in how you choose to respond to situations.

Of course one's action should be dictated by actions of reactions of others, I shouldn't be able to shoot a guy I don't like regardless of how much I desire to, because it won't be to my or others well being, the golden indicator is utilitarianism, but it's hard to lift your end of the bargain when others don't.

Oh, I wasn't talking about the reactions of others. What I meant was that just because everyone is doing A, doesn't mean you don't have the freedom to decide on your own terms if you want to do A. That's different from deciding if you want to do A based on the potential reactions of others.

And obviously, I recommend that you make a smart head-over-heart decision regarding A that ultimately benefits you. Think about it this way - you're not bound by any bargain. No one is entitled to be nice to you. You, on the other hand, are perfectly free to decide if you want to be logical and virtuous, and whether that would benefit you. In my view, logic nearly always benefits me. I dunno about virtue.

 

[scorpiomover]

The Golden Rule seems to be so hard to apply if you are discriminated and oppresed constantly and your actions are not reciprocated,

It sounds like you are talking about the rule "Do unto others as you would want others to do to you", the belief that each person should treat others in the way they want to be treated, so that if everyone takes that attitude, then everyone would enjoy "the good life".

It's a form of sacrifice. Some give more than others, in the hope that this will cause those who didn't sacrifice anything to have an even better life.

E.G. sacrificing a virgin to the volcano deity, so the rest of the tribe will be able to live a great life, eating from the plentiful foods that can be grown with the volcanic soil found near volcanoes.

The sacrifice doesn't have to be a willing participant. But obviously, it would be preferable if they are persuaded into doing it, so that we don't have to strong-arm the sacrifice.

if someone is bullying you for the emotional rewards how do you justify acting logically with a force that is not logical, why shouldn't you just fucking kill him for the emotional reward? Because your action might lead to consequence which decrease your emotional well being right? Well what if his action of illogicality (Is that even a word?) is not punished? Why does he have the right to act upon his desire, ignor logic, do harmful action on others and not be prosecuted for it? Why should you have the obligation to do virtues and logical action then? Then the logical action for society is for you to reciprocate his action so that some flaws in the system are mitigated and some asshole bullies go six feet under right? This is bassically why we love vigelantees so much.

So even if your action brings you adverse effect it could be positive precedent to everyone else on how to clean up where the justice system have failed, therefore it would bring a net positive effect for society.

Then what should the principle of action which the society adhere to? Since you don't have to have moral instinct if not reciprocated againts then how do you fix a society where everyone is an asshole to eachother.

The Old Testament's exhortation is "love your friend like you".

1) If you are not being beaten up, then don't beat up your friend.
If you have food and your friend has none, share some of your food with your friend.
If you have a job and your friend does not, help your friend to get a job as well.
If you have a girlfriend and your friend does not, make sure your friend gets a girlfriend as well.

2) If you don't have enough food for the both of you to share and still live, then you can't love your friend in a way that would be like the way you love you. Either you love you, or you love your friend. So then the Old Testament Golden Rule doesn't apply.

If you are in a situation where you both can't be not beaten up, e.g. if your friend is beating you up, and if you don't hit your friend back, then he will keep hitting you, then if you don't hit your friend, you are loving your friend MORE than yourself. So the rule doesn't apply.