this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
10 points (91.7% liked)
Actual Discussion
219 readers
1 users here now
Are you tired of going into controversial threads and having people not discuss things, circlejerking, or using emotional responses in place of logic? Us too.
Welcome to Actual Discussion!
DO:
- Be civil. This doesn't mean you shouldn't challenge people, just don't be a dick.
- Upvote interesting or well-articulated points, even if you may not agree.
- Be prepared to back up any claims you make with an unbiased source.
- Be willing to be wrong and append your initial post to show a changed view.
- Admit when you are incorrect or spoke poorly. Upvote when you see others correct themselves or change their mind.
- Feel free to be a "Devil's Advocate". You do not have to believe either side of an issue in order to generate solid points.
- Discuss hot-button issues.
- Add humour, and be creative! Dry writing isn't super fun to read or discuss.
DO NOT:
- Call people names or label people. We fight ideas, not people here.
- Ask for sources, and then not respond to the person providing them.
- Mindlessly downvote people you disagree with. We only downvote people that do not add to the discussion.
- Be a bot, spam, or engage in self-promotion.
- Duplicate posts from within the last month unless new information is surfaced on the topic.
- Strawman.
- Expect that personal experience or morals are a substitute for proof.
- Exaggerate. Not everything is a genocide, and not everyone slightly to the right of you is a Nazi.
- Copy an entire article in your post body. It's just messy. Link to it and maybe summarize if needed.
For more casual conversation instead of competitive ranked conversation, try: [email protected]
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That word "simply" is doing a lot of very heavy lifting there.
Early in my stay in China, I lived in a little city¹ called Jiujiang. There was a hotel that had an attached restaurant making "western" food that other expats in the city would congregate in for a taste of "home" when China was being too Chinese for them. (Culture shock is real and profound.) I was hanging with the gang once, one of whom was a former collegiate Aussie Rules football player. Big, strong, tough guy. With us was one of our "foreign affairs assistants".
Just outside the hotel window, near where we were sitting, was a drama blowing up. A husband was berating his wife and, at one point, smacking her hard several times. Like shockingly hard. Phil (the aforementioned football player) was up in an instant, rushing for the restaurant door. As one of the few expats who could speak the local language he started lacing in to the guy, grabbing his arm and twisting it up behind his back, such that the farmer's face was pressed up against the glass of the window. From what he reported later he was apparently telling the guy that if he ever saw him raise hands against a woman again he was going to be a bloody mess on the ground.
The farmer and his wife hastily shuffled off when Phil let go.
When Phil came back, he was all pleased with himself for leaping in to stop a problem. For saving the weak against the abusive strong.
I'm going to let you think a moment on Phil's actions and decide if his actions were "moral" or "immoral". If he was making things better or worse. I'll put the outcome into a reply.
¹ Where "little" means "population of about 4.5 million". Scales are … different here.
TL;DR summary: It's not always so simple to not make things worse. The choices are not always obvious; the situations aren't always clear.
When Phil came back basking in what he was sure was going to be profuse praise for his bravely intervening in a domestic violence situation he was surprised to find out that only his fellow expats (spoiler warning: myself excluded, because Mom's Chinese and I knew what was coming) were doing so. Chinese witnesses were glaring at him. Our "foreign affairs assistant" had a very stony expression on her face. (Yes. Her.) Here's the paraphrased conversation that ensued:
Foreign Affairs Assistant (FAA): What did you think you accomplished here?
Phil (P): I stopped a guy from beating his wife.
FAA: No. No you didn't. You made him lose face.
P: Well if he didn't want to lose face he shouldn't have beaten his wife!
FAA: All you have done is made him angry. He knows he can't do anything to you, both because you're much larger and more violent than him [Phil was very shocked at the 'more violent' part of this.—zdl] and because you're a foreigner and will be protected by the police.
P (slowly dawning): …
FAA (increasingly angry): Now that man is going to take control of his face once more by 'proving' to himself and his wife that he is the strong one. What would have been handled by her relatives talking to his relatives and getting justice done through private censure is now getting handled by that woman probably winding up in the hospital … and the social approach to justice will have its hands tied; police will become involved, the man will be jailed, the woman will lose her source of household income, and will be in great pain possibly requiring more money to pay for medicine. You haven't saved her from anything. You've made her life immeasurably worse. (final words in great sarcasm) You are truly a great hero.
My point of view would generally be that people who try to make things better, even if in individual cases make them worse, will, generally, overall learn from those mistakes and get better at their decision-making. (Similarly if someone who helps themselves at the expense of others accidentally helps them, they will "learn" from is as well, not making that "mistake" in the future).