Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Core Values (3WW)

My good buddy Niassne and I were talking about logically evaluating topics. I know. I know. It seems almost impossible these days for the thoughtful application of logic to actually take place, but we're programmers...we like logic. It's not just part of our jobs, it's part of how we think and generally operate things in our lives.

Don't act like you guys haven't evaluated some choice at some point using a complex "IF" statement.

Anyway...we kind of stumbled upon this idea of "Need" Vs. "Right". Because we feel like we need something does that mean we have the right to that? Because we have the right to something does that mean we need it?

There are several examples I could make that are prone to offend, but that's not really what I'm trying to get across here.  What I'm trying to provoke is a little extra thought before we simply react to a given topic making it that much more volatile.

Lets take the man in Florida who wanted to burn the Koran.  Does he have the right to burn that book?  In this country he absolutely does, but should he?  An interesting continuation to that story...apparently another man stole the copy of the Koran that another man was about burn (I don't believe it was the same guy that started the whole thing...just a supporter).  Did he have the right to steal that book?  Simply put...NO.  Stealing is stealing and it's simply wrong, not to mention against the law.  Now it could be said that the man who stole that Koran did the right thing, even a needed thing, to protect the feelings of Muslims across the country.

And that's what it really comes down to...need is a much more flexible word, at least in my mind.  A need can be considered valid or not based solely on a person's point of view.  Where as, a right seems much more concrete.  If one person has a right to something then so does everyone else.

But where do need and right intersect?  What is their place in the process of lawmaking?  I think that on a personal level needs will most likely take precedence over rights, at least in our everyday activities and I think that's what allows us to be emotionally driven by the media or politics or almost anything really.

And since that's true, or at least I think it is, I feel like maybe Niassne's got something with this whole core values idea.  Core values, that you and I as individuals can use to evaluate how we feel about a particular topic.  One complication of this idea, that I find is the prioritization of these values.  Does God always take precedence over Country or does Country sometimes win?  Or should things always be evaluated on a level playing field?

I know this is a more demure Monk then you usually read, but lets check our outrage and anger at the door and evaluate some of the topics we've taken a stance on recently with a calm and logical pattern of thought.

12 comments:

senderupwords said...

This is a terrific piece. Nice 3WW. Love and Light, Sender

Christian said...

This post was a bit over the place for me. Not sure what is the point you are trying to get across. We need separation of church and state or we need to distinguish the difference between want or needs.. idk. Btw, I would probably use Qur'an instead of Koran. Salaam Alaikum :)

The Bear Monk said...

I thought "lets check our outrage and anger at the door and evaluate some of the topics we've taken a stance on recently with a calm and logical pattern of thought." kind of summed up what I was trying to say, but Lord knows I felt a little all over the place writing this.

Qur'an is how it's spelled? I just did a quicky spelling check in google...I get it led me astray.

Dreamer said...

An interesting argument - Need vs Right. I do believe that we do not have a right to something just because we feel that we need it, more so because once we have what we need we often end up wondering why we needed it in the first place.

Angel said...

Thought provoking piece.

ThomG said...

I like how you've used the three words and constructed a thoughtful piece of writing that takes a look at today's topics. Loved - and agree - with the ending.

Jay Thurston said...

I just today read your WoW piece prior to this, and I have to say in commenting on BOTH pieces, that your writing style and topics of discussion are coming from a wide spectrum. That is good, keeps the reader unexpecting of what you will hit them with next.

Christian said...

I don't think either way is misspelt or incorrect. But, I think Qur'an is a better romanization. Arabic is a very phonetic language, much more than my native Spanish, so I think it resembles more the Arabic sound. I am not a linguistics expert though :p

Thomma Lyn said...

I agree about checking our anger at the door. A well-written and thoughtful piece, and I like your call for people to stand back and consider things thoughtfully instead of indulging in blind, knee jerk reactions which only lead to more trouble.

Deborah said...

Thoughtful and well written peice!

Lilly said...

I think it's funny sometimes when a person thinks that just because they want something really badly that they have a "right" to it. Like, when an angry customer doesn't agree with a store's return policy, they start trying to tell them it's violates their rights or whatever. I kind of find it amusing, but that's just me.

Very thought provoking post!

Gnetch said...

Hey! This is awesome. It's past my bedtime and you got me thinking. Yes, thought provoking is the best way to describe this post. :)