Rationalization

[SillyMe]

LOL, I am sure you are right. It seems sort of silly that another person's approval helps ease whatever feelings of guilt you would have.

I wonder if anyone has ever been questioned on using a refillable mug at the 'wrong' resort and responded with "Hey, I was told it was ok by people on an internet message board"...

I'll give it a try next time I go. They should be fun reactions. You should've seen how people reacted in AC when we told them we all met on the internet.

 

[PixiePop]

I have never understood what makes a person feel like he/she is beyond the rules. I would love to have an opportunity to stop the person that is cutting in line, driving in the wrong lane, trying to use a mug from 3 years ago....etc.. and ask ..why do you think it is ok for you to disobey the rules?

 

[Reflection]

......We have gradually shifted our values away from community needs and onto individual needs. So, if you can find a way to justify your actions on an individual level, you now expect and demand the community to understand, accept and even respect your actions.....

Your complete post made perfect sense. I wanted to comment on the above by noting if the community understands but refuses to accept, and is quite adamant, in not respecting an individual's actions, then the community is judgemental, holier than thou, too overly concerned about an individual's behavior, etc.....

 

[yeartolate]

If you are going to break the rules - I can't stop you. But for goodness sake, don't come to an IBB asking 75000 people to say it is right to abuse refillable mugs, over occupy rooms, etc. The DIS is not a confessional where you can finish with three hail Mickey's and absolve yourself, 'kay?

 

[bicker]

if the community understands but refuses to accept, and is quite adamant, in not respecting an individual's actions, then the community is judgemental

Not necessarily. It goes back to what I said before: If the actions are extensibly inconsistent, then the community has every right to refuse to accept them. "Extensibly inconsistent" means that the action, if practiced by everyone, could not be sustained. An example would be cutting in queue. As long as only a small number of deviants practice the actions, the system itself is only moderately affected, yet continues to serve its purpose of sequencing people into a facility. Once a significant number of people refuse to acknowledge the premacy of society's structure for this, the system breaks down. People see their time in queue as a burden because other, less moral people are spending much less time in queue and getting the same service. After a threshold, the practice begins to incentise people to be violators more than the decency incentives them to be moral. A community has the right and obligation to condemn any action that would lead towards such a death-spiral.

 

[ticktock]

Most large things in nature are a culmination of small things. The current situation is in reverse. Usually a culture slides back into the pit because of small lapses in their morality are accepted, and then larger ones. Our culture has decided to start with the greater of the evils and then work backwards. When a violent criminal is given lieniancy because of childhood traumas, why should you have to limit your refillable mug use?

People want rights without responsibility. That is easily understood. The condemnation of society is what keeps everyone in check. If you don't confront the people who behave in a manner that is detrimental to society at large, than everyone will begin behaving that way. So everytime you say "excuse me, the line starts back there" you are taking a stand for the common good, as absurd as that sounds.

 

[poohandwendy]

The condemnation of society is what keeps everyone in check.

Therein lies the problem, IMO. In our 'feel good' society, it is more and more being considered shameful to cast judgement upon even those who are doing the wrong thing.

 

[shy little mouse]

PAW & Bicker, great posts! I really don't have anything more to add to the discussion, because I agree 100% with both of you. As a lurker, I don't generally express opinions. About 7 years ago I was banned on another IBB (and it was a disney related site, lol, too much pixie dust there) for expressing opinions that were not pc enough.

As another poster stated, when you take a moral/ethical stance on issues, you are deemed to be "judgmental". Consequently, I tend to just read different posts and make my judgements in silence. Usually, there are like-minded individuals who express their opinions, so there is no need for me to. Lest you think I shy away from confrontation on moral/ethical principles (a contribution to the disintegration of morals/ethics is the unwillingness of those who possess them to actually hold others accountable), I am pretty outspoken IRL. I just don't put too much emotional investment to posting on an IBB. KWIM?

 

[shy little mouse]

People want rights without responsibility. That is easily understood. The condemnation of society is what keeps everyone in check. If you don't confront the people who behave in a manner that is detrimental to society at large, than everyone will begin behaving that way. So everytime you say "excuse me, the line starts back there" you are taking a stand for the common good, as absurd as that sounds.

Yes, ticktock, I have actually said that to people before. Many people may stand there in line and think that, but won't say anything, because they don't want to "make a scene." I have no problem waiting my turn in a line, and don't feel it is unrealistic to expect the same of others. Good example.

 

[chobie]

Therein lies the problem, IMO. In our 'feel good' society, it is more and more being considered shameful to cast judgement upon even those who are doing the wrong thing.

The problem lies in that often what other people think is doing the wrong thing is something that does not affect them or society. Like being homosexual. They should be ashamed of trying to discriminate against them or casting judgment.

When doing the "wrong thing" is based on a religious belief system and not based on what is infringing on others rights, then we are right as a society to consider that wrong to cast judgment.

But if we are going to make comments about the "feel good" society. What about the people who "feel good" about trying to discriminate against others because they beleive their religion wants them to do that?

It's not all black and white.

 

[chobie]

PAW & Bicker, great posts! I really don't have anything more to add to the discussion, because I agree 100% with both of you. As a lurker, I don't generally express opinions. About 7 years ago I was banned on another IBB (and it was a disney related site, lol, too much pixie dust there) for expressing opinions that were not pc enough.

As another poster stated, when you take a moral/ethical stance on issues, you are deemed to be "judgmental". Consequently, I tend to just read different posts and make my judgements in silence. Usually, there are like-minded individuals who express their opinions, so there is no need for me to. Lest you think I shy away from confrontation on moral/ethical principles (a contribution to the disintegration of morals/ethics is the unwillingness of those who possess them to actually hold others accountable), I am pretty outspoken IRL. I just don't put too much emotional investment to posting on an IBB. KWIM?

The problem is that that we don't all have the same moral/ethical beleif system. It's one thing to hold people accountable when their actions infringe on someone else's rights, its another thing when we impose our ehtical/moral belief system on others for things that do not infringe on other peoples' rights.

As for the whole PC thing...I find that the people who are the quickest to condmen alleged PCness, are also the quickest to get offended when someone makes a less than positive comment about their lifestyle, religion, culture, job etc. ain other words, its okay for them to offend others, but don't you dare offend them.

 

[shy little mouse]

The problem is that that we don't all have the same moral/ethical beleif system. It's one thing to hold people accountable when their actions infringe on someone else's rights, its another thing when we impose our ehtical/moral belief system on others for things that do not infringe on other peoples' rights.

As for the whole PC thing...I find that the people who are the quickest to condmen alleged PCness, are also the quickest to get offended when someone makes a less than positive comment about their lifestyle, religion, culture, job etc. ain other words, its okay for them to offend others, but don't you dare offend them.

Yes, it is true that we all share differing moral/ethical systems. From reading bicker's previous posts I know that he does not adhere to any sort of religious sect and I am Roman Catholic, but that does not mean that from a moral/philosophical viewpoint that we have to disagree. We all agree that there are certain standards of behavior and statutes that must be upheld to remain in an orderly society. What bicker was citing was not a discussion on the morality of abortion (I don't want to get into such weighty and divisive issues), but rather the failure of individuals to accept responsibility in their role in maintaining a civil environment. Am I perfect? Heavens no! Yet, if I get a speeding ticket (and I have) I am not going to gripe about it, but rather pay the fine, accept responsibility, and drive safer in the future. If Disney has rules about refillable mugs, I will just spend the extra $ (going to WDW is a LUXURY, not a right) and adhere to their rules. I believe that that is the context of this discussion.

When you are citing biogtry and racism, those are different stories. Respecting other human beings and treating others decently is the ethically right thing to do. I don't believe that is the issue at hand.

As for being offended easily, lol, nope that is not the case at all! I am very comfortable with myself and who I am as a person. I don't look to an IBB for validation, nor am I overly concerned with what others think. People bash Catholics all the time, on the dis and IRL. I let it roll off me. I accept the fact that I am not going to necessarily agree with others and that they are not going to agree with me.

BTW, my non-pc act was to start a thread about the proliferation of strollers and older children using them at WDW. That was basically what got me banned from another site. So, no, it wasn't some huge deal where I am such an awful bigot. However, if you want to think I am some big mean judgemental person, be my guest; as I already stated, I could care less.

I loved philosophy in college. I must be such a nerd.

 

[poohandwendy]

The problem lies in that often what other people think is doing the wrong thing is something that does not affect them or society. Like being homosexual. They should be ashamed of trying to discriminate against them or casting judgment.

When doing the "wrong thing" is based on a religious belief system and not based on what is infringing on others rights, then we are right as a society to consider that wrong to cast judgment.

But if we are going to make comments about the "feel good" society. What about the people who "feel good" about trying to discriminate against others because they beleive their religion wants them to do that?

It's not all black and white.

I am clearly talking about people ignoring clear cut rules that are not based on values, religion or morals. Like the example the OP gave. You have a whole other tangent going on there.

 

[chobie]

Yes, it is true that we all share differing moral/ethical systems. From reading bicker's previous posts I know that he does not adhere to any sort of religious sect and I am Roman Catholic, but that does not mean that from a moral/philosophical viewpoint that we have to disagree. We all agree that there are certain standards of behavior and statutes that must be upheld to remain in an orderly society. What bicker was citing was not a discussion on the morality of abortion (I don't want to get into such weighty and divisive issues), but rather the failure of individuals to accept responsibility in their role in maintaining a civil environment. Am I perfect? Heavens no! Yet, if I get a speeding ticket (and I have) I am not going to gripe about it, but rather pay the fine, accept responsibility, and drive safer in the future. If Disney has rules about refillable mugs, I will just spend the extra $ (going to WDW is a LUXURY, not a right) and adhere to their rules. I believe that that is the context of this discussion.

When you are citing biogtry and racism, those are different stories. Respecting other human beings and treating others decently is the ethically right thing to do. I don't believe that is the issue at hand.

As for being offended easily, lol, nope that is not the case at all! I am very comfortable with myself and who I am as a person. I don't look to an IBB for validation, nor am I overly concerned with what others think. People bash Catholics all the time, on the dis and IRL. I let it roll off me. I accept the fact that I am not going to necessarily agree with others and that they are not going to agree with me.

BTW, my non-pc act was to start a thread about the proliferation of strollers and older children using them at WDW. That was basically what got me banned from another site. So, no, it wasn't some huge deal where I am such an awful bigot. However, if you want to think I am some big mean judgemental person, be my guest; as I already stated, I could care less.

I loved philosophy in college. I must be such a nerd.

OMG, you didn't start that thread about strollers and older kids here did you?

I hate the term PC because I think it is overused. And I have seen some of the same people who cry about having to be PC get offended when someone makes a sterotypical comment that hits close to them. You can't have it both ways. Either everyone sould be able to say whatever they want no matter how offensive, or everyone should try to be respectful of others.

 

[chobie]

I am clearly talking about people ignoring clear cut rules that are not based on values, religion or morals. Like the example the OP gave. You have a whole other tangent going on there.

Yes, but when the conversation gets into generalizations about the "feel good" society and absolutes between right and wrong then I feel the need to point out that it what is right and wrong is a lot more complicated then what can be expressed in a couple of buzz words or bumper sticker slogan. JMHO.

 

[shy little mouse]

Nope, it was at an IBB that has even more pixie dust flying around then this one. I am betting the name would be filtered out, so I won't even say it. It was 7 years ago now, and it was obviously a sacred cow to many of the parents who felt like pushing their 10 year olds (slight exaggeration there) around in a stroller. It was a good issue to go out on, lol.

 

[shy little mouse]

I hate the term PC because I think it is overused. And I have seen some of the same people who cry about having to be PC get offended when someone makes a sterotypical comment that hits close to them. You can't have it both ways. Either everyone sould be able to say whatever they want no matter how offensive, or everyone should try to be respectful of others.

I agree. I believe in free speech almost to a fault. However, there is a time and a place for everything, and certainly every thought that pops into your head shouldn't be broadcast to the rest of the world! One of my coworkers literally says everything she thinks, and it isn't a pretty sight. It is to the point where we have complained to management about her lack of professionalism in dealing with patients, families, and coworkers. We joke that she has no filter between her brain and her mouth.

 

[poohandwendy]

Yes, but when the conversation gets into generalizations about the "feel good" society and absolutes between right and wrong then feel the need to point out that it what is right and wrong is a lot more complicated then what can be expressed in a couple of buzz words or bumper sticker slogan. JMHO.

When something is clearly a rule, there is an absolute. Sorry you do not approve of the way I have expressed my thoughts on the matter. It is only my opinion of why people rationalize breaking rules that are clear and then expect societal acceptance. I think our feel good society has benefits too.

 

[chobie]

When something is clearly a rule, there is an absolute. Sorry you do not approve of the way I have expressed my thoughts on the matter. It is only my opinion of why people rationalize breaking rules that are clear and then expect societal acceptance. I think our feel good society has benefits too.

Well, this true when it comes to things like the refillable mugs. The rule is stated in black in white. However, at POP century, there is nothing said about the refillable mugs being only for the length of stay where you purchase them. When you go to the drink statio to fill them up, then it states the policy. So, that could maybe be seen as bait-and-switch.

But as for others things, would you punish a person who stole a loaf of bread for a starving child?

 

[shy little mouse]

Well, this true when it comes to things like the refillable mugs. The rule is stated in black in white. However, at POP century, there is nothing said about the refillable mugs being only for the length of stay where you purchase them. When you go to the drink statio to fill them up, then it states the policy. So, that could maybe be seen as bait-and-switch.

But as for others things, would you punish a person who stole a loaf of bread for a starving child?

Ahhhh, the old "stealing for a hungry child" idea. I would be the first to buy that hungry child a loaf of bread, lol. True, there are acts that are counter to society's established statutes that are understandable, such as civil disobedience in a tyrannical government or stealing a loaf of bread for a hungry child, but that is not the discussion at hand.

Refillable mugs are governed by WDW. Perhaps they should be clearer about their policies, but as I stated before, it is not a necessity to stay there and be subjected to their policies and procedures. Let's assume for a moment that WDW does have a bait-and-switch approach to refillable mugs. I, the customer, can: choose not to buy one, to complain to management, or stay elsewhere. I don't have a good ethical reason to disobey their rules just because I feel they are misleading; there are other options.