Rules oriented

[Miker]

I have a strong sense of justice and hate unfairness. Unfortunately, rules and fairness are two separate things and they don't always coincide, and that can bring me into conflict with authority. Many of the rules and laws that are made by society simply aren't fair.

Would you say that laws are made by society or for society?
I would say that in England we are ruled over by an establishment elite. They create laws in full view of a population in denial. It is rarely when they stir on mass that laws are questioned.
Once a slave class, always a slave class!

 

[Progster]

Would you say that laws are made by society or for society?
I would say that in England we are ruled over by an establishment elite. They create laws in full view of a population in denial. It is rarely when they stir on mass that laws are questioned.
Once a slave class, always a slave class!

Rules are often made by a minority for the majority, and those who make the rules have no idea of the reality or impact that their rules will have on others. Sometimes they are driven by idealism and not by practical sense, as those who propose them and vote them into law live completely different lives to those that the laws affect. Here, they made a law that whoever owns property should pay property tax, and this tax is levied regardless of the person's income, and they are expected to pay. Some people who own property have lost their jobs and are unemployed, yet still expected to pay the property tax. Having property doesn't mean that you have money and enough income to pay taxes, so many people here are forced into severe poverty because the government is asking them to pay money that they haven't got. This kind of thing is unfair.

 

[Miker]

Rules are often made by a minority for the majority, and those who make the rules have no idea of the reality or impact that their rules will have on others. Sometimes they are driven by idealism and not by practical sense, as those who propose them and vote them into law live completely different lives to those that the laws affect. Here, they made a law that whoever owns property should pay property tax, and this tax is levied regardless of the person's income, and they are expected to pay. Some people who own property have lost their jobs and are unemployed, yet still expected to pay the property tax. Having property doesn't mean that you have money and enough income to pay taxes, so many people here are forced into severe poverty because the government is asking them to pay money that they haven't got. This kind of thing is unfair.

Agree totally, which is why I think that representative democracy is a failure. Participation by the electorate, I.e. participatory democracy is the only way forward. Just look at Switzerland!

 

[On the Inside]

As I see it, there's kind of a difference between following the rules and having a strong sense of right and wrong. Also, I believe right and wrong are sometimes a matter of opinion.

I feel I do have a strong sense of right and wrong....for me. I would not attempt to impose that sense on anyone else. I don't make the rules, and I don't like anyone else, that is an individual, trying to make the rules. That, I believe, is meant to be democratically decided. I really bristle at someone trying to be the big boss man.

Unless someone is a business owner, ships captain, military general, etc. then of course they would be in a position to make some rules, but there would still be an overarching socially or politically derived set of rules.

 

[Miker]

I feel I do have a strong sense of right and wrong....for me. I would not attempt to impose that sense on anyone else. I don't make the rules, and I don't like anyone else, that is an individual, trying to make the rules. That, I believe, is meant to be democratically decided. I really bristle at someone trying to be the big boss man.

Unless someone is a business owner, ships captain, military general, etc. then of course they would be in a position to make some rules, but there would still be an overarching socially or politically derived set of rules.

On the whole, I would agree with you. Aspies sit on a spectrum and we all have different traits but it seems that on average aspies do have an extreme sense of right and wrong, a need to follow rules to the letter and in my humble opinion it holds us back in life unless we are able or lucky to find that lifestyle of job that suits our traits. From many messages on this website I would suggest that quite a lot of aspies do not find the magic bullet to happiness.
As has also been pointed out from a number of insightful responses, in the real world unethical rules or laws need to be challenged or bypassed so following to the letter of the law is not always 100% possible.

 

[Crossbreed]

Though a part of me wants perfection (as I best understand it), I acknowledge the real-time limitations imposed by the Law of Diminishing Returns. It is a bit like the disconnect found between pure math and real-time physics. The best we can do is factor in those uncertainties pseudo-statistically.

 

[Miker]

Though a part of me wants perfection (as I best understand it), I acknowledge the real-time limitations imposed by the Law of Diminishing Returns. It is a bit like the disconnect found between pure math and real-time physics. The best we can do is factor in those uncertainties pseudo-statistically.

So on that basis how would answer the question posed by Judge in a previous response regarding the judgements made by the German population and the German soldiers during the second world war. (See previous post)
PS regarding individuals ethical decision making in the face of society's/ colleagues influence!

 

[On the Inside]

individuals ethical decision making in the face of society's/ colleagues influence!

For me, that would be the test of how strongly one abides by one's sense of right and wrong, one's own personal ethics. Easy for me to say, I've never had that sense or my personal ethics stressed by threat of exile, imprisonment or death. Diminishing returns, indeed.

 

[Crossbreed]

I'm not sure which post you are referring to. To me there seems to be two types of civil disobedience:

• Public, where you expect to be a martyr of sorts, and
• Surreptitious, where you plan to stay "in business" as long as possible.

Schindler and the ten Booms are good examples of the latter and it seems like the best approach to take in Hitler's Germany.

This dilemma seems most pronounced in the choices made by the abolitionist, John Brown.

 

[On the Inside]

I suspect I would go the surreptitious route, myself. Long history of subversion and sneaking around under dictatorial conditions.

 

[Crossbreed]

The Biblical Book of Daniel shows both kinds:

• Subtle in chapter 1:8-16 (diet protest)
  
• Public in chapter 3:8-23 (fiery furnace)
  
• Public in chapter 6:6-17 (lion's den)

 

[Crossbreed]

There are:

1. RULES,
2. rULES,
3. Rules and
4. rules.

"Rule of ⍝" would be close to #4. It isn't imperative, either, but it is the, as yet, most efficient way known for doing something that can still be done in less efficient ways.

 

[Miker]

"Rule of ⍝" would be close to #4. It isn't imperative, either, but it is the, as yet, most efficient way known for doing something that can still be done in less efficient ways.

Would you utilise the same reasoning with laws?

 

[Ste11aeres]

I'm not sure which post you are referring to. To me there seems to be two types of civil disobedience:

• Public, where you expect to be a martyr of sorts, and
• Surreptitious, where you plan to stay "in business" as long as possible.

Schindler and the ten Booms are good examples of the latter and it seems like the best approach to take in Hitler's Germany.

This dilemma seems most pronounced in the choices made by the abolitionist, John Brown.

Speaking of Nazi Germany, the Austrian farmer Franz Jagerstaatter was a good example of the first type of civil disobedience. He was executed for it.

 

[Miker]

Speaking of Nazi Germany, the Austrian farmer Franz Jagerstaatter was a good example of the first type of civil disobedience. He was executed for it.

Just read about the guy, it goes to prove that all sense of humanity goes out of the window during times of war. Maybe he was an Aspie, as I would take the same view of conscription, probably end up the same way!

 

[Crossbreed]

Would you utilise the same reasoning with laws?

It is more-or-less a given in lower-impact laws, like the aforementioned jaywalking, or using hand signals on my trike (when there is no traffic around to appreciate them).

As you go up in the degree of legal responsibility, their consequences become less negligible. Jaywalk on a vacant street? Sure. ("Kids playing [ball] on the street" is probably, technically, jaywalking.) Rob a vacant bank? Still no.

 

[Crossbreed]

Speaking of Nazi Germany, the Austrian farmer Franz Jagerstaatter was a good example of the first type of civil disobedience. He was executed for it.

I don't recognize that name. The first name that occurs to me is Dietrich Bonhoeffer.