• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Compassion

Are they, or is it the compassion that's missing? Or something else along those lines.

It depends on the definition of compassion one adheres to. Some people think of it as sympathy, others believe it is understanding. I'm in the latter camp. I have compassion for many people that I don't agree with (I understand where they are coming from), but it doesn't change my view or make me likely to sway from my own ideas. Compassion (imo) is understanding without feeling like one needs to change the situation. Iow, I can understand your position without prejudice or the need to change your mind.
 
Last edited:
Ever watch Oz? The one line I've never forgotten is (sadly paraphrased, because I can't find it) "How would you like it if the worst thing you ever did determined the course of the rest of your life?"

The course of our lives is always determined, in part, by our actions for good or ill. How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?
 
Is it your contention that those are the only two options?

The course of our lives is always determined, in part, by our actions for good or ill. How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?
 
Is it your contention that those are the only two options?

In reality, they probably are. Everything that one does has an effect of some kind. Some positive, some negative. Often, things kind of balance out, but there are not effects without underlying causes. It may be that a bad experience you have may be the effect of something your parents did, but all events have causes and effects. "No man is an island".
 
No. There is middle ground. I'm not saying nothing is affected, of course it is. I'm saying it is possible to NOT have the rest of somebody's life determined by the worst thing they ever did. If you're not going to employ capital punishment, then people need to be able to do their time and move on with their lives. And while they are doing their time, they need to redirect their lives.

In reality, they probably are. Everything that one does has an effect of some kind. Some positive, some negative. Often, things kind of balance out, but there are not effects without underlying causes. It may be that a bad experience you have may be the effect of something your parents did, but all events have causes and effects. "No man is an island".
 
No. There is middle ground. I'm not saying nothing is affected, of course it is. I'm saying it is possible to NOT have the rest of somebody's life determined by the worst thing they ever did. If you're not going to employ capital punishment, then people need to be able to do their time and move on with their lives. And while they are doing their time, they need to redirect their lives.

How does that conflict with what I said?:confused:
 
He said "How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?" and I said are those the only two options? Either it affects completely, or it doesn't at all?" and you said yes. So I said no - there is middle ground. It doesn't have to be one of two extremes.

How does that conflict with what I said?:confused:
 
He said "How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?" and I said are those the only two options? Either it affects completely, or it doesn't at all?" and you said yes. So I said no - there is middle ground. It doesn't have to be one of two extremes.

He didn't say "affects completely, or it doesn't at all". He said
The course of our lives is always determined, in part, by our actions for good or ill. How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?

to which you responded:
Is it your contention that those are the only two options?

Affect or not affect is the question, and I missed anything implying that he meant "effects completely, or not at all". Actions do always have effects. Just because you may do something that you regret does not mean it will not effect your life. Sometimes the effects are bad, but this doesn't stop one from trying to make amends and moving forward rather than being paralyzed by regrets.

Take a rather extreme example: Say a person murdered someone when he was young. At the time, he may not feel any regret for doing so, based on his emotional and psychological level. He gets convicted and sent to prison for his act. Some time down the road, he gives his action some real consideration, and he has grown as an individual to the point that he can see the error of his ways. He feels deep regret and wishes he had not done what he did. He grieves that he was ever so foolish or hateful. He cannot change the act, but he can come to a personal realization and change himself and move forward. His actions had bad consequences, but he learned from them and made a positive move. He can now perform actions that are positive, and to me, that's always a good thing. You can't change the past, but you can let it go and not let it ruin your life.
 
Last edited:
default.jpg


Compassion?
Don't you remember? I sold it to you yesterday.
 
But my response was specifically to the "How would you like it" question.

He didn't say "affects completely, or it doesn't at all". He said

to which you responded:


Affect or not affect is the question, and I missed anything implying that he meant "effects completely, or not at all". Actions do always have effects. Just because you may do something that you regret does not mean it will not effect your life. Sometimes the effects are bad, but this doesn't stop one from trying to make amends and moving forward rather than being paralyzed by regrets.

Take a rather extreme example: Say a person murdered someone when he was young. At the time, he may not feel any regret for doing so, based on his emotional and psychological level. He gets convicted and sent to prison for his act. Some time down the road, he gives his action some real consideration, and he has grown as an individual to the point that he can see the error of his ways. He feels deep regret and wishes he had not done what he did. He grieves that he was ever so foolish or hateful. He cannot change the act, but he can come to a personal realization and change himself and move forward. His actions had bad consequences, but he learned from them and made a positive move. He can now perform actions that are positive, and to me, that's always a good thing. You can't change the past, but you can let it go and not let it ruin your life.
 
The course of our lives is always determined, in part, by our actions for good or ill. How would you like it if the worst things people did never had any effect on them?

I don't see things as so black and white and I don't believe that some people feel the effect of their actions at all.

"tread softly when you have to deal with those of simpler parts
for if truth were told all unaware you tread upon their hearts".
Sangarachitta


A lot of people do not have the sensitivity to know when they are hurting others. Our society allows us to hurt others by law. We still live to a great extent as the survival of the fittest. We work so hard we lose ourselves and have little time for our families. I think most of us walk along half unconscious most of the time because we are too busy.

Buddhism sees compassion as loving kindness. The dictionary says it is
a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering.

Compassion | Define Compassion at Dictionary.com

Where we come from with our compassion will determine whether it is any use or not. Most people who need compassion, like it or not have at some time been really hurt. They respond to this by blocking off. Once they have blocked off they are able to hurt other people because they no longer feel empathy.

Compassion does not see the person who has committed a fault as the fault. That is the difference. It sees a hurt person who underneath that pain is as good as anyone else but who has in the past or still is at the moment acting in a hurtful or in some other anti social way. But that is not the person. That is the act.

Compassion speaks to the person underneath. Sometimes that person can hear and starts to respond. Whatever anyone has done to get themselves into the situation which needs compassion cannot be changed but it is possible to bring most people back to their humanity rather than leaving them as 'the act', 'the fault'.

and of course compassion sometimes is for people who have done nothing wrong at all.

I think compassion and empathy walk close together.

A political internet forum would not be my first place to go looking for compassion!
 
That is very well-written. I know what you are saying in the last line, but I really can't help wondering if people would throw out all the same old talking points if they thought wait a minute, is this the same thing I would tell my own sister if she were in those shoes?? It's easy to just flippantly toss out a response when you don't perceive actual lives hanging in the balance.

I don't see things as so black and white and I don't believe that some people feel the effect of their actions at all.

"tread softly when you have to deal with those of simpler parts
for if truth were told all unaware you tread upon their hearts".
Sangarachitta


A lot of people do not have the sensitivity to know when they are hurting others. Our society allows us to hurt others by law. We still live to a great extent as the survival of the fittest. We work so hard we lose ourselves and have little time for our families. I think most of us walk along half unconscious most of the time because we are too busy.

Buddhism sees compassion as loving kindness. The dictionary says it is

Compassion | Define Compassion at Dictionary.com

Where we come from with our compassion will determine whether it is any use or not. Most people who need compassion, like it or not have at some time been really hurt. They respond to this by blocking off. Once they have blocked off they are able to hurt other people because they no longer feel empathy.

Compassion does not see the person who has committed a fault as the fault. That is the difference. It sees a hurt person who underneath that pain is as good as anyone else but who has in the past or still is at the moment acting in a hurtful or in some other anti social way. But that is not the person. That is the act.

Compassion speaks to the person underneath. Sometimes that person can hear and starts to respond. Whatever anyone has done to get themselves into the situation which needs compassion cannot be changed but it is possible to bring most people back to their humanity rather than leaving them as 'the act', 'the fault'.

and of course compassion sometimes is for people who have done nothing wrong at all.

I think compassion and empathy walk close together.

A political internet forum would not be my first place to go looking for compassion!
 
That is very well-written. I know what you are saying in the last line, but I really can't help wondering if people would throw out all the same old talking points if they thought wait a minute, is this the same thing I would tell my own sister if she were in those shoes?? It's easy to just flippantly toss out a response when you don't perceive actual lives hanging in the balance.

I agree with what you say but I found as soon as I joined an internet forum that that was what they are like. Unfortunately you know the things they say you should not talk about and one of them being 'politics'.

I tend to respond to people much the way they are to me but like most people if someone is insulting me I get irritated. For that reason I would not advise someone who believed they needed compassion to go to an internet political forum.

Now I had treatment for cancer. I joined an internet forum. I got all the compassion I needed and also the opportunity to give it back which is obviously good for you.

I think almost everyone finds on the forum at some point their feelings get riled and their fingers type before they have had time to let it settle. This sort of thing would be unlikely to happen with friends and family because our family know us so well and we choose our friends.
 
Oh, now I get it. I'm not looking for compassion for me. I'm looking for compassion for the people we discuss so dispassionately. Take sides and fire away. You know how it goes.
 
Oh, now I get it. I'm not looking for compassion for me. I'm looking for compassion for the people we discuss so dispassionately. Take sides and fire away. You know how it goes.

Ah, well that is your way. Not the way of everyone. Sorry I misunderstood you...but it is the same. I think yes people will deal with on an internet forum in much the same way as they do in life. That is my guess. If they show no compassion, my guess is they would be hard on people outside.
 
Is it your contention that those are the only two options?

No. There is middle ground. I'm not saying nothing is affected, of course it is. I'm saying it is possible to NOT have the rest of somebody's life determined by the worst thing they ever did.

For many people-- far too many-- the worst thing they have ever done determines the course of someone else's life. Should they be allowed to have their own lives back? No one act defines us, but every act we commit stays with us forever. If our worst acts are grave enough, they will and should overshadow everything else we've done.

If you're not going to employ capital punishment, then people need to be able to do their time and move on with their lives. And while they are doing their time, they need to redirect their lives.

I agree with you. Life sentences are unspeakably cruel and pointless.

Compassion does not see the person who has committed a fault as the fault. That is the difference. It sees a hurt person who underneath that pain is as good as anyone else but who has in the past or still is at the moment acting in a hurtful or in some other anti social way. But that is not the person. That is the act.

Some people can be helped. Some people cannot. Compassion is wasted on the latter.

Oh, now I get it. I'm not looking for compassion for me. I'm looking for compassion for the people we discuss so dispassionately. Take sides and fire away. You know how it goes.

I discuss everything dispassionately. Emotion guides our reasoning, but it must not be allowed to cloud our reasoning. We practice compassion by doing what is right, doing what is best. If we allow ourselves to be blinded by rage, we hurt people who need and deserve our help-- but if we allow ourselves to be blinded by pity, we protect people who are too weak to change or who are too dangerous to trust, and the end result is also that more people are hurt.
 
I believe I alluded to that up a bit, when compassion is taken too far it becomes enabling.

Good post, thank you.

I discuss everything dispassionately. Emotion guides our reasoning, but it must not be allowed to cloud our reasoning. We practice compassion by doing what is right, doing what is best. If we allow ourselves to be blinded by rage, we hurt people who need and deserve our help-- but if we allow ourselves to be blinded by pity, we protect people who are too weak to change or who are too dangerous to trust, and the end result is also that more people are hurt.
 
Hope you don't mind me butting in Korimyr. I am about to go to sleep so it will not be for long!

For many people-- far too many-- the worst thing they have ever done determines the course of someone else's life. Should they be allowed to have their own lives back? No one act defines us, but every act we commit stays with us forever. If our worst acts are grave enough, they will and should overshadow everything else we've done.

I am not desparetly keen on people's lives being overshadowed. On a purely selfish level, if we do not feel good about ourselves, we tend to act less good. I accept however that anyone who is a danger to society needs to be kept locked up for the safety of the rest of society. Ideally I would prefer the person healed.



Some people can be helped. Some people cannot. Compassion is wasted on the latter.

For most people this is completely true. However there are gifted people who seem to be able to reach just about everyone. We had a psychiatrist here in the UK who managed to get 6 of the most cruel psychopaths to start to feel empathy again. This illustrates that everyone can be reached but not all of us have the ability so should not try - certainly with psychopaths!!.


I discuss everything dispassionately. Emotion guides our reasoning, but it must not be allowed to cloud our reasoning. We practice compassion by doing what is right, doing what is best. If we allow ourselves to be blinded by rage, we hurt people who need and deserve our help-- but if we allow ourselves to be blinded by pity, we protect people who are too weak to change or who are too dangerous to trust, and the end result is also that more people are hurt.

I differentiate between emotion and feeling. Emotions I see as a reaction but feeling comes from our inner selves. They are grounded and include things like intuition, empathy and compassion. Sometimes one can be feeling and have emotions which are reactive but appropriate. Feeling however generally indicates an integration of emotions so would not include the negative emotions you speak of. I see compassion as best when based in empathy and genuineness rather than just reasoning. We cannot reason another's story, another's pain we can only be open for them to tell us it. That being open is I believe part of compassion.

Now I am off to bed.
 
Back
Top Bottom