I saw this bit of wisdom, “No one is ever harmed by doing the right thing.” on one of those signs in front of a public school. Does anyone really believe this? Does anyone care to defend the statement? Is it appropriate to pass this off as truth to children,? to adolescents? to anyone?
As a phrase, it might be generally useful in trying to determine what “the right thing” is. Clearly, one should seek to minimise the harm done to people by one’s actions.
However, as an absolute statement it is clearly false. Even were we theoretically capable of collating and assessing all of the consequences of an action including those far into the future, we could surely never rule out any consequences which engendered “harm”. All that we can do is make a ‘best guess’.
But the phrase does not talk about harm to others, just of the harm to the actor. While minimizing ones own harm is certainly in ones self interest, it is hardly a guide to doing the right thing. If one takes the phrase a face value, then one can assume that a course of action can be eliminated as the right thing to do if it results in harm to oneself. This seems to imply that sacrifice is never the right thing to do.
Also anyone who is harmed obviously deserves it because they would never be harmed by doing the right thing.
Really? It says no one is harmed - that suggests both the actor and other people to me.
These glib catchphrases are supposed to be eyecatching little mottos which often don’t stand up to too much scrutiny - I suspect there are many different interpretations.
It’s a meaningless, stupid phrase. What is 'harm"? What is “the right thing”? Surely I’m harmed if I try to stop a rapist and he ends up killing me. Or if I simply call the cops and he he does the same thing.
One would be better off following something like the Golden Rule. It’s hard to find fault in that phrase, as overused as it might be.
Moreover, I think it should be obvious from looking at some of the personal threads on the BBQpit tha it isn’t true. Doing the right thing often - sometimes inevitably hurts good people and bad. It can break friendships, destroy families, and send people to prison. Maybe these things are right, and many people could argue that many of the above weren’t worth having. But it still hurts.
I disagree. A plain reading is simply that “there is no agent such that the agent is harmed and the agent has done the right thing,” ‘no one’ being the subject. Your reading seems to come from, “When the right thing is done, no one is harmed,” where the subject is not stated. I don’t believe those sentences have the same sense.
There are two ways to look at this; first off, you could consider it a tautological statement; since non-harm is an admirable and worthy goal, the right thing to do is to act to prevent all harm, therefore whatever you do that prevents all harm, is the ‘right thing’
But I suspect the actual meaning of the phrase is something similar to ‘honesty is the best policy’ - that if you are good and upright in your doings, you are invulnerable to harm. Nice idea, but clearly untrue.
I take it as erislover does. It says that no one is ever harmed by doing the right thing, not no one is ever harmed by someone else who is doing the right thing. I have trouble with this being presented by an institution that is teaching children. What does it teach them? Nothing useful certianly, and it provides a moral shelther for selfish behavior.
I believe in doing (or at leasy trying yo do) the “right thing.”
What, you’d prefer “Fuck them before they fuck you?”
So I’m an idealist. Shoot bullets through me.
Speaking slowly and clearly: “or…at…least…trying…to…do…” :smack:
I prefer “When in doubt, tell the truth” which more clearly states the intent without all the implied saccharine.
How so? How is doing the right thing “selfish”
I’m not getting your objections, lee. Don’t we WANT our children to do the right thing?
The saying is patently false; can’t all of us recall an incident where we did the right thing, and were personally damaged by doing it? As simple a thing as informing the cashier that she gave us too much change. It’s the right thing to do, but the result is we lose money.
I’m all for doing the right thing, but let’s be honest with ourselves and with schoolkids – sometimes doing the right thing hurts. We’re not doing kids a service by lying to them about this; they’ll find out the truth on their own sooner or later.
I take the above as the meaning of the statement. If we accept the statement as true, and use it to determine what the right course of action, then right away any actions that will lead to harming oneself can be eliminated. All courses that involve self sacrifice in anyway are immediately eliminated as they can’t possibly be the right thing. It leads to always putting ones own interests above any others. It can also be used to judge others. Anyone who follows a course of action that resulted in harm to themselves obvioulsly did not choose to do the right thing, the moral thing and deserves no pity, or sympathy, or assistance.
If the right thing were easy to do, and caused no harm, everybody would do the right thing anyway and we wouldn’t need morality, philosophy or religion.
Many times, doing the right thing involves acting against one’s own best interests or taking on a burden that one might be better served not to take on or making a sacrifice that one doesn’t need to make.
It should be obvious that “no one is ever harmed by doing the right thing” is bullshit, pure and simple.
Perhaps it might be better phrased, “The harm done by not doing the doing the right thing outweighs any done by doing the right thing.”
Or something to that effect?
Guin, if that’s what they meant by what they wrote, then the folks who designed the sign need English composition classes a whole lot more than they need ethics classes.
Probably.
I don’t as it is not true.
No, it’s inappropriate.
Fer cryin’ out loud, it’s a positive message meant to inspire youngsters. That’s all. Get a grip.
We tell kids all sorts of things that aren’t true. Partly to instill good morals and manners, and partly to shield them from the ugliness of “real life” for a little while.
We lie to them about Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny. We make them recite the Pledge of Allegiance, even though they have no clue what it means. We send them to Sunday school.
They’re kids. Let 'em be kids for a while and do kid things and think kid thoughts.
There’s plenty of time for them to learn life’s nastier lessons.