You can follow the ethical principle of always telling the truth, you can also follow the principle of telling white lies whenever that will make the other person feel better.
If you are consistent and the other person can expect you to follow your principles they won’t ask you for opinion if the truth will hurt them and you have the policy to always tell the truth.
If you don’t have principles and sometimes tell the truth and sometimes tell white lies, it’s however much harder for the other person to interact with you to avoid getting hurt.
When driving and there are pedestrians who want to cross the street, you have two valid choices. Stop and let them pass the street before you or continue driving with your speed.
When I started taking driving lessons I got the idea of going the middle way of driving slower. That was stupid. It doesn’t provide the pedestrians with valid information that they can use to adapt their behavior towards myself.
Hurt feelings often come from people expecting something which doesn’t happen. If you follow some codex of ethics and the other person understands which codex of ethics you follow, they won’t be in much emotional pain if you act in according with that codex because they can expect you to do so.
it’s a matter of preventing people from getting hurt.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t think that focusing on preventing other people from getting hurt is good for a loving relationship.
In the past I also found it very condescending when other people thought that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me. Give me all the information that I need to make a decision but in the end it’s my own decision if I want to risk getting hurt.
Here we have another principle: “Have ethics and morals, and be consistent about following them, so that people know what to expect, and don’t feel betrayed, cheated, or disappointed.”.
In the past I also found it very condensing when other people thought that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me. Give me all the information that I need to make a decision but in the end it’s my own decision if I want to risk getting hurt.
Here we have another principle: “Have ethics and morals, and be consistent about following them, so that people know what to expect, and don’t feel betrayed, cheated, or disappointed.”.
That’s not the kind of principle that you create as a result of Fault Tree Analysis.
Then you might want to edit this too: “that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me.” The syntax is ambiguous.
I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of “Do not protect me from my own stupidity, give me all the relevant information and let me make my informed decisions as a responsible adult”. Problem is,
it is possible that the other person is unwilling to share all the relevant info with you (privacy, information hazard, shame, cowardice, dishonesty) or even unable (they don’t know or they can’t properly put it into words)
Even in possession of all relevant information, you may find yourself making the wrong decisions because you’re not quite in your right mind. I don’t know about you, but when I am high on sexual arousal I can barely even talk.
It’s not about protecting others from their stupidity, but from your own.
I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of “Do not protect me from my own stupidity, give me all the relevant information and let me make my informed decisions as a responsible adult”
I do share those sentiments but they don’t fully describe my position I’m not focused on the mental stuff.
Even in possession of all relevant information, you may find yourself making the wrong decisions because you’re not quite in your right mind. I don’t know about you, but when I am high on sexual arousal I can barely even talk.
I might make decisions that bring me emotional pain, but then I’ll learn worthwhile lessons.
it is possible that the other person is unwilling to share all the relevant info with you (privacy, information hazard, shame, cowardice, dishonesty) or even unable (they don’t know or they can’t properly put it into words)
I think it’s very useful to learn nonviolent communication to express your emotional needs to give the other person the information he needs.
I however wouldn’t say that everyone has to learn nonviolent communication because it’s not the only model that works.
You can follow the ethical principle of always telling the truth, you can also follow the principle of telling white lies whenever that will make the other person feel better.
If you are consistent and the other person can expect you to follow your principles they won’t ask you for opinion if the truth will hurt them and you have the policy to always tell the truth.
If you don’t have principles and sometimes tell the truth and sometimes tell white lies, it’s however much harder for the other person to interact with you to avoid getting hurt.
When driving and there are pedestrians who want to cross the street, you have two valid choices. Stop and let them pass the street before you or continue driving with your speed. When I started taking driving lessons I got the idea of going the middle way of driving slower. That was stupid. It doesn’t provide the pedestrians with valid information that they can use to adapt their behavior towards myself.
Hurt feelings often come from people expecting something which doesn’t happen. If you follow some codex of ethics and the other person understands which codex of ethics you follow, they won’t be in much emotional pain if you act in according with that codex because they can expect you to do so.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I don’t think that focusing on preventing other people from getting hurt is good for a loving relationship.
In the past I also found it very condescending when other people thought that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me. Give me all the information that I need to make a decision but in the end it’s my own decision if I want to risk getting hurt.
Here we have another principle: “Have ethics and morals, and be consistent about following them, so that people know what to expect, and don’t feel betrayed, cheated, or disappointed.”.
Condensing?!
That’s not the kind of principle that you create as a result of Fault Tree Analysis.
Ah, good! Someone who actually knows about this! Well, help me out here; we do have a causation tree, yes?
“Inconsistent Behavour → Broken Expectations → Pereption of Defection”.
Probably intended to be “condescending”.
Yes. I edited.
Then you might want to edit this too: “that they should make the decisions about risk getting hurt for me.” The syntax is ambiguous.
I see you have that Classic Liberal mentality of “Do not protect me from my own stupidity, give me all the relevant information and let me make my informed decisions as a responsible adult”. Problem is,
it is possible that the other person is unwilling to share all the relevant info with you (privacy, information hazard, shame, cowardice, dishonesty) or even unable (they don’t know or they can’t properly put it into words)
Even in possession of all relevant information, you may find yourself making the wrong decisions because you’re not quite in your right mind. I don’t know about you, but when I am high on sexual arousal I can barely even talk.
It’s not about protecting others from their stupidity, but from your own.
I suggest that it is probably counterproductive to make this a debate about identity rather than about issues.
I do share those sentiments but they don’t fully describe my position I’m not focused on the mental stuff.
I might make decisions that bring me emotional pain, but then I’ll learn worthwhile lessons.
I think it’s very useful to learn nonviolent communication to express your emotional needs to give the other person the information he needs.
I however wouldn’t say that everyone has to learn nonviolent communication because it’s not the only model that works.