(no subject)
On Wednesday I cycled in to work as usual. At one junction, while most of the cyclists piled up at the red light, one woman rolled on through. This *really* annoys me. It states that "I'm above the law" and "the rules don't apply to me". The thought that crossed my mind was to yell at the woman: "the light is red! the rules apply to you too! You're no better than one of those looters!!" I didn't, of course, because kicking open a can of worms on my commute to work is something I try to limit these days.
On Thursday I was in a lift (elevator) with some young, male colleagues. One of them was telling the rest how he used to dodge paying for his train journeys by simply walking through the barriers during busy times. His friends laughed but also tut-tutted and said "you're no better than a looter!" (in jest, of course).
But it all made me think. When is "bending the rules" just "bending the rules" and when does it cross a line where the law needs to be enforced. You would think that, if everything worked properly, all crime would be punished. But it isn't. And so, if you cycle through a red light and nobody gives you a warning, then you keep on doing it. Some of the children who have been turned in by their parents after this week's rioting are absolutely shocked that their children would steal. However, I hear that some of the children also really don't know why they did it. A lot of them said that... pretty much, "it was there". And there didn't seem to be any law enforcement. If you or I saw a free pair of shoes/jeans/bottle of wine, would we take it or walk on by?
You might think that my next sentence is going to be: Surely then we can understand these looters if we, ourselves, bend the rules and get away with things that are, in essence, illegal occassionally. But no, that's not my point. I'm more intrigued by the way that, regardless of legal issues or even religious convictions, we often have to police our own morals. When you see the opportunity to do something illegal, it is up to you to decide whether this thing would be OK - FOR YOU. If you could face yourself in the mirror the next morning, then there probably won't be much keeping you from doing whatever it is you *want* to do. Unfortunately, in many cases, illegal behaviour is not punished and so a habit may form. And the sad part is, even if you act in a way that would be considered "moral" in a societal sense (e.g. NOT claiming expenses for houses you don't live in or trips you didn't take), you don't get praised for it. Most moral acts go completely unnoticed. So if you do the wrong thing, you very well might get away with it. If you do the right thing, there's no reward in it. People very much respond to reward. They might even respond to correction, should this be applied - but it rarely is. You have to find gratification in the knowledge that you did the right thing.
I've probably been thinking about this because of watching this programme. Really interesting. According to the presenter, the "reward them when they've done well" technique is something which is "not popular" amongst British child psychologists, while this is a mainstay in the USA. It makes so much sense to me, as, well, when you've taught children anything in a formal school setting, you will now that bribery ALWAYS works. Promise them something nice if they come up with the goods, and they will most certainly come up with the goods.
...I suppose one of the problems with rewarding is that some people feel that they are either always entitled to a reward, or should get the reward in any case regardless of keeping up their side of the bargain.
Oh humans. How complicated (and shitty) we can be...
On Thursday I was in a lift (elevator) with some young, male colleagues. One of them was telling the rest how he used to dodge paying for his train journeys by simply walking through the barriers during busy times. His friends laughed but also tut-tutted and said "you're no better than a looter!" (in jest, of course).
But it all made me think. When is "bending the rules" just "bending the rules" and when does it cross a line where the law needs to be enforced. You would think that, if everything worked properly, all crime would be punished. But it isn't. And so, if you cycle through a red light and nobody gives you a warning, then you keep on doing it. Some of the children who have been turned in by their parents after this week's rioting are absolutely shocked that their children would steal. However, I hear that some of the children also really don't know why they did it. A lot of them said that... pretty much, "it was there". And there didn't seem to be any law enforcement. If you or I saw a free pair of shoes/jeans/bottle of wine, would we take it or walk on by?
You might think that my next sentence is going to be: Surely then we can understand these looters if we, ourselves, bend the rules and get away with things that are, in essence, illegal occassionally. But no, that's not my point. I'm more intrigued by the way that, regardless of legal issues or even religious convictions, we often have to police our own morals. When you see the opportunity to do something illegal, it is up to you to decide whether this thing would be OK - FOR YOU. If you could face yourself in the mirror the next morning, then there probably won't be much keeping you from doing whatever it is you *want* to do. Unfortunately, in many cases, illegal behaviour is not punished and so a habit may form. And the sad part is, even if you act in a way that would be considered "moral" in a societal sense (e.g. NOT claiming expenses for houses you don't live in or trips you didn't take), you don't get praised for it. Most moral acts go completely unnoticed. So if you do the wrong thing, you very well might get away with it. If you do the right thing, there's no reward in it. People very much respond to reward. They might even respond to correction, should this be applied - but it rarely is. You have to find gratification in the knowledge that you did the right thing.
I've probably been thinking about this because of watching this programme. Really interesting. According to the presenter, the "reward them when they've done well" technique is something which is "not popular" amongst British child psychologists, while this is a mainstay in the USA. It makes so much sense to me, as, well, when you've taught children anything in a formal school setting, you will now that bribery ALWAYS works. Promise them something nice if they come up with the goods, and they will most certainly come up with the goods.
...I suppose one of the problems with rewarding is that some people feel that they are either always entitled to a reward, or should get the reward in any case regardless of keeping up their side of the bargain.
Oh humans. How complicated (and shitty) we can be...