Re: Rules
From: Kay Argyle (Kay.Argyleutah.edu)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 17:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
The only thing that posting agreements (rules, laws, manners) assumes is
that people's memories aren't perfect.  Is it disrespectful if your
significant other posts a note on the fridge reminding you that the items
you agreed to stop at the store for are yogurt, mayo, cornflakes, cucumbers,
and turtle beans? Is it disrespectful that our dining room has a home-made
poster on the wall with a list of good table manners that the children
themselves came up with?

As others have pointed out, whether an agreement has the consent of the
governed is unrelated to its formality (that is, where it falls on the
spectrum from social more to written law). Most people are not thinking
about the death penalty when they refrain from murdering someone they find
annoying - laws against murder are consensual. Cultures often enforce
"modest" dress in women by harassment - some social mores are coercive. 

I think people who are rule-shy have had experience of rules that combined
two at-best marginally related traits - they were formalized and they were
coercive - and have generalized (often unconsciously) that formal equals
coercive. IMO, this is somewhat like concluding that (a) zebras run away
when frightened, (b) zebras are black and white striped, (b) skunks are
black and white striped, (d) therefore skunks run away when frightened.
(Please make sure I'm not downwind if you test this hypothesis.)

You don't need to worry about being sprayed with butyl mercaptan if a zebra
stamps its foot, and mutually agreed-upon beneficial rules don't suddenly
become tyrannical when put in writing - but there's no convincing some
people of that.

Kay
Wasatch Commons


Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.