The favour/slight system overcommits to punishing defection. I'm 97% sure this is because it assumes you can't just execute the defector. Secondarily because it assumes rational verbal pleas don't work, and you have to use visceral nonverbal violence.
Is the system a leftover from preverbal hominids? Or is that in fact a good assumption - most Caino hypocriens are, in fact, nonverbal? The latter doesn't really make sense, as rules are typically stated verbally, and they'll go all rules lawyer on them so they can be hypocrites. The system is just busted.
A fortiori: the spite system has no time component. Super busted. The only time it's even possibly good to get angry and violent is immediately, so the target will associate the pain with the action and develop an aversion response. There almost absolutely no point whatsoever in nursing a grudge.
Certainly, allowing this system to drive decisions is simply foolish. Resist 100%. Immunity is virtus and sophia.
I believe the rhetorical definition of vengeance and grudges and wrath and all that stuff refers to the spiteful outputs of slight-redress system. The problem is the logical definition of vengeance includes executing or ostracizing defectors. The rhetorical definition deliberately conflates spite and justice so as to defend defectors from righteous retribution.
When you throw out the rhetorical definition and go back to defecting on defectors, remember not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Don't legitimize spite. Continue to resist this completely busted nonverbal system, 100%.
No comments:
Post a Comment