English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This scenario is hypothetical.

Suppose a man's wife is murdered and a close friend advices him against personally avenging his wife when the opportunity arises, and he heeds that advice. Sometime later the guilty, for sake of argument, person is arrested but later released for some reason. The person then goes and murders the widowed man's child.

My question then is not if the advice against vengeance is wrong, or if the friend has any responsibility for the outcome, but if it would be insensitive of that friend to repeat the advice, noting the end result of the widower having taken his friend's advice and having trusted in the justice system.

I believe the friend should ask another person to repeat it. Were I the widower, I don't know if I could be rational toward my friend.

What do you think?

2006-10-30 04:46:21 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Psychology

3 answers

hmmm... it might come off the same regardless Who repeats it.. because to the widow, his wife and child are now dead. he already suppressed his desire to take vengeance the 1st time. if anyone advises him not to take revenge, most likely than not the widow will react irrationally.

2006-10-30 04:57:27 · answer #1 · answered by sasmallworld 6 · 0 0

I think he should still tell his friend not to seek vengeance. Two wrongs never make a right.

Personally, I'd probably have to become a murderer myself!

2006-10-30 12:56:02 · answer #2 · answered by startwinkle05 6 · 0 0

startwink is correct, two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left...vengeance is not all it's cracked up to be, though it might make you feel a little better, for a while...

2006-10-30 12:58:50 · answer #3 · answered by boots 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers