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

In order for it to fit into your worldview?

For example:
If your value is 'respect for all others', are your actions and treatment of others a true representation of how u really feel about them as individuals (parts). Or do you feel compelled to go by values of respect for humanity (the whole) which may cause you to alter your exchanges with another.

Does this mean that you learn not to react to the actual individual and his/her particular situation, but rather to abide by a set of axioms that aren't precisely relevant.

Do you cast aside your ability to relate to 'another' in order to relate to 'others'?

2007-05-17 06:29:46 · 6 answers · asked by (notso)Gloriouspipecleaner 3 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

6 answers

This is pretty well-known in psychological circles. Some people make decisions ahead of time. This isn't necessarily a bad thing - it can very often be life-saving if you don't have to ponder each unique situation as it arises.

And perhaps it goes without saying, but if you are not thinking about something, then you are not thinking about it!

Con-men and undercover agents will be the first to tell you that the easiest way to remain unidentified is to be identified as something else. Once someone has 'put you in a box', most of them stop worry about whether you really BELONG in that box. It's the same thing that keeps racism and prejudice going.

So yes. Making your decisions ahead of time with a pre-existing moral code tends to limit your options and your thinking. However, it also lets you do things faster and easier. And let's not forget that there's a difference between a tendancy and a certainty:

A wise person may have pre-concieved ideas, but he also goes to the extra trouble of seeing if they are right. It's more work, but that way you have your cake and eat it too.

Everybody wins!

2007-05-17 07:02:25 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 0 0

In regards to the example,
There are advantages and disadvantages to absolute
implementation of one style or the other. Implementation
should be based on contingency of the situation.

Consider 'respect for all others' as individuals. The
considering individual must make the assumption
that the individual represents themself in a way which
is conducive to respectful treatment. If the considering
individual rationalizes that the individual doesn't
know what proper representation is then the considering
individual should probably avoid aggressive interaction
with the individual.

Consider 'respect for all others' as a whole. If I am
understanding this correct then this means comparing
an individual to the average individual of the whole.
The advantage of such an approach is that it is conservative.
The disadvantage of such an approach is that it doesn't
have as much flexible precision as the individual approach.
Therefore, as an advantage the considering individual
might state "if respect A is appropriate for individual A
then respect A is appropriate for individual B considering
that they are both members of the same society". However,
if individual A and individual B are opposite polar outliers
then respect A might not be appropriate for the two.

"Do you cast aside your ability to relate to 'another' in order to relate to 'others'?"

If I can interchangeably substitute 'another' and 'others' with
'self' then I feel that my ability to relate is authentic.

2007-05-17 07:01:47 · answer #2 · answered by active open programming 6 · 0 0

I relate to a person as an individual not as a member of a Group. This is still called decency where I come from.

2007-05-17 07:24:31 · answer #3 · answered by hobo 7 · 0 0

No, I am not perfect and I do mess up, but God is always there to take me back, just like Hosea demonstrated. I am a Christian and I will not change my belief in Christ for anything.

2007-05-17 06:39:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

i treat every individual as an individual. if you begin to categorize you end up with enemies, enemies group together as do allies. war !

2007-05-18 03:31:05 · answer #5 · answered by gands4ever 5 · 0 0

No because when you have a foundation that is built on strong values you will see the bigger picture..........and stand your ground................

It is important to have values but in life those values will change and that will keep you open to the big picture of your life..............

2007-05-17 06:40:31 · answer #6 · answered by Rita 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers