Are rules meant to be broken?

Forums: Philosophy, Morality, Rules
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The Ideas I will present here is not my own, however, I have no reference to whom they belong.

Is it our nature to conform or is it something we are taught in order for society to function. If the prior, then that would explain why the milligram experiments had such horrific results. However, could deviation be our nature, testing the waters of our society until we learn what is right and wrong. This would explain why children have to be told no you can't steal that candy bar, but it must be paid for.

Lastly, if morals are something learned then breaking the rules is needed, correct. How else can one learn what the rules are unless they have been pushed. It is funny how the outcome of a war can decide how history books title a individual terrorist or freedom warrior.

What do you think, should the rules be broken?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 16 • Views: 10,332 • Replies: 52

rules should be broken only if the lesson is worth the consequence, killng people to learn that u shouldnt would be less of a lesson and more of a scarring experience for everyone.
and non-comformity is also more for people who havent thought far ahead to see the lesson they would learn- and the consequence they would receive.
yes learning the hard way is the best way to remember lessons- but not at the expense of teacher, student or anyone else.

0 Replies

@anonymous6059,

Humans are complicated, most want to be liked and like the easy road and like to follow the rules, but there are some who have a deep need to not follow the rules.

0 Replies

@anonymous6059,

Mostly, it's a good idea to know why rules are there before deciding to break them.

1 Reply

No man willingly does what he thinks is wrong. Now what he thinks is wrong can be determined either by his ready acceptance of the "always already" norms of the community in which he lives, or by a critical examination of these that may result in different values. Isn't that intellectual challenge, in a sense "breaking the rules?"

2 Replies

@jgweed,

People willingly do what they think is wrong all the time. Jails are full of them. (Insane asylums are full of the ones who insist that it wasn't actually wrong.)

1 Reply

@anonymous6059,

anonymous6059 wrote:

The Ideas I will present here is not my own, however, I have no reference to whom they belong.

Is it our nature to conform or is it something we are taught in order for society to function. If the prior, then that would explain why the milligram experiments had such horrific results. However, could deviation be our nature, testing the waters of our society until we learn what is right and wrong. This would explain why children have to be told no you can't steal that candy bar, but it must be paid for.

Lastly, if morals are something learned then breaking the rules is needed, correct. How else can one learn what the rules are unless they have been pushed. It is funny how the outcome of a war can decide how history books title a individual terrorist or freedom warrior.

What do you think, should the rules be broken?

Sometimes, if rules are onerous, or harmful in some other way, we should consider breaking them. But do you think that the rules of chess (for example) were made to be broken. If everyone broke the rules of chess, guess what?

1 Reply

@jgweed,

No Jg, I have done things that have been against my own system of morals. I suspect, if you really think about it, that you have too. Having an understanding of moral values, and following them, are two different things... but breaking one's own moral values is a common human experience.

This could include little things like calling in sick to watch a baseball game, or taking shortcuts on taxes. It could be big things like stealing or lying. But humans' all do things we feel guilty about.

Bernie Madoff knew he was doing something wrong. But, so did Tiger Woods. And, if you are really honest with your self... so do you.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

There is a big difference between laws and moral values. It is not that hard to come up with a real life example where breaking the law is the morally correct thing to do.

1 Reply

Doesn't human error makes it justified to break rules? Politicians and Jurists are only human after all and can't be expected to take all circumstances into account when passing laws. If one's freedom is restricted unnecessarily then sometimes it is necessary to break free of the rule - forcing it to be reassessed. e.g if the suffragettes hadn't smashed the social rule of 'quite acceptance' and 'submission', then maybe we wouldn't have gotten the vote, ergo the charismatically charming Tony Blair wouldn't have lasted a decade without some of those loyal voters Wink

0 Replies

jgweed wrote:

No man willingly does what he thinks is wrong. Now what he thinks is wrong can be determined either by his ready acceptance of the "always already" norms of the community in which he lives, or by a critical examination of these that may result in different values. Isn't that intellectual challenge, in a sense "breaking the rules?"

sozobe wrote:

People willingly do what they think is wrong all the time. Jails are full of them. (Insane asylums are full of the ones who insist that it wasn't actually wrong.)

ebrown p wrote:

No Jg, I have done things that have been against my own system of morals. I suspect, if you really think about it, that you have too. Having an understanding of moral values, and following them, are two different things... but breaking one's own moral values is a common human experience.

This could include little things like calling in sick to watch a baseball game, or taking shortcuts on taxes. It could be big things like stealing or lying. But humans' all do things we feel guilty about.

Bernie Madoff knew he was doing something wrong. But, so did Tiger Woods. And, if you are really honest with your self... so do you.

I agree with jgweed. Even those who admit in hindsight that something that they did was wrong must have justified it in their own minds at the moment of carrying out the act. At that moment, they decided that it was not in some way or another wrong -or wrong enough. If it were still percieved as "wrong" they would not, as jgweed pointed out, willingly do it.

1 Reply

it may depend on how you interpret the rules

40 some years ago my father worked dispatch for a medium sized police force, one serial shoplifter they regularly processed had an interesting view of the rules, once caught he accepted all consequences, and accepted the idea that what he'd done was a crime, but before that, while in the act he didn't see it as such, shoplifting was only a crime if you were caught, if he got away with it, it was just a way to survive ( he stole small items, like an alarm clock or radio and then later tried to return them for cash, claiming he'd lost the receipt)

0 Replies

@thack45,

Quote:

At that moment, they decided that it was not in some way or another wrong -or wrong enough. If it were still percieved as "wrong" they would not, as jgweed pointed out, willingly do it.

I might be the strange one here... but I can speak from personal experience.

When I do something that is wrong (by my own moral standards), I don't indulge in the type of self-deception you are describing. If I were going to get a lap dance, for example, I wouldn't pretend there is any justification for it (other then at the moment I really wanted it).

Come on now! Human's do things they know are wrong all the time. Pretending that they aren't wrong is silly.

Now there are different levels of wrong. There are things that I would never do because the moral consequences are too high. But there are certainly cases where I will accept the fact I am breaking my own moral rules because the consequences are acceptable for the short term impulsive benefit I sense at the time.

I don't think I am the only person who has done things they knew fully well was wrong while they were doing it.

I guess I feel that moral failing is preferable to self-deception.

0 Replies

@anonymous6059,

Rules r usually not meant to be broken,
but it happens anyway.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Rules r usually not meant to be broken,
but it happens anyway.

What about spelling rules?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Quote:

Rules r usually not meant to be broken,
but it happens anyway.

ebrown p wrote:

What about spelling rules?

YES!!!!!

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

What about gun-control ? Registration and so forth ?

1 Reply

@roger,

Such as that no smoking sign next to the shed where you keep the dynamite.

0 Replies

@Pepijn Sweep,

Pepijn Sweep wrote:

What about gun-control ? Registration and so forth ?

The same as rules against stealing money, Pep; the rules against it were enacted and violated.

0 Replies

"Let's make up rules and allow everyone to not follow them." But doesn't that mean that we don't understand what a rulereally means?

And all rules are not of equal weight; there are hierarchies, as Antigone knew when she buried her brother even though it was against one rule because to do so was to obey a higher rule.

And many rules often "allow for exceptions." Killing is wrong unless for self-defence or for one's country or for one's religion.

1 Reply

Are rules meant to be broken?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know