If you need permission, approval, or even discussion about something, then the subject has to be broached. However the flaw in this is that if approval is not found, then you're met with disapproval, when you would have been better off not talking at all. To put it in an analogy, a child wants to take a cookie from the cookie jar. Asking first would be preferable, assuming he got permission. It would save him worrying about being caught. However if he's refused, then suddenly obtaining a cookie is far more difficult, because the caregiver is on alert, and if a cookie goes missing, he's going to be under more suspicion than if he just took it in the first place. There are other scenarios, such as trying to discuss an obscure interest with someone ("Hey, do you have an interest in collecting Dakimakura?") or even "If I happened to be gay, would you disown me?" It's about weighing up the chance of getting the approval with the retribution for not doing so, such as being slapped on the wrist for stealing a cookie, or being disowned due to sexual preference. A quick google points out this has been asked before here, and as it's a problem I encounter regularly, I'm interested to here others' take on it. I used to go for the 'ask permission' aspect, but in the past year or so, I've found myself avoiding permission in fear of being rejected. (Either way, I usually do what I want, but if I'm refused, I have to be significantly more careful.)
Concerning permission: This is a formality at best. It's merely an interface for dealing with the who-wants-it-more situation in a friendly, non-aggressive manner. Civilized society finds many benefits to this, but at times it gets caught up in mental paperwork, like the situations you described. I ask when it's ostensible that I should ask, and take when it's not; and if I find I should have asked, I rescind my action and ask. It's one system, and it works for me as long as I'm consistent about it. As long as one is consistent about one's system, no one can cast blame. They just have to speak up if the system bothers them. What else can conceivably be done? As for approval. One should only seek approval from those whose opinions matter to them; disapproval in any other circumstance is the province of the paranoid and overly self-conscious by which to be bothered. My stepfather disapproves of a lot of things I do/am; I couldn't give a sh** if I double-fisted jugs of ex-lax, because his opinion doesn't matter to me. Now, if one of my closest friends disapproves of something about me, I have to wonder if I'm making a mistake or going against who I want to be. Approval is not a currency to be passed around for petty favors and self-serving displays, it's a measurement by which one can judge what one wants to do or wants to be. Thus, one should be discerning in whose approval/disapproval is paid heed. Problems in that area are not inherent problems with the concept of approval, rather difficulties in understanding what approval should be or how it should work.
Not necessarily. In some cases, asking permission actually leaves a good impression, regardless of whether you're allowed or rejected (unless of course your request is absurd). To elaborate upon your example: If a child asks permission, he may be more likely to meet with a positive answer. Parents dig politeness. Bosses dig politeness. The fairer sex digs politeness (even if they fall for "bad boy" types, a minimum of chivalry seems to be the norm). Only if you completely ignore the fact that asking permission is also just a basic form of respect towards the person you request something from. You're not the center of the world, and one shouldn't act upon the thought that they are. Which is the first step to virtually any crime in existence. Doing what you feel like regardless of what someone else might think or feel about it leaves the door wide open towards trespassing, theft and harassment.
Yes, that does leave a good impression. It depends on whether that alone makes up for the hindrance of being refused. In most situations, I find it doesn't. More likely to meet with a positive answer than what? Only if you completely ignore the fact that asking permission is also just a basic form of respect towards the person you request something from. You're not the center of the world, and one shouldn't act upon the thought that they are. On the contrary, I AM the centre of the world. Or to be more specific, my world. You're the centre of your world, and everyone's the centre of their own. Almost every action we take is with the goal of improving our standing in others' eyes, or gaining something for ourselves. You suggested yourself that asking permission is better because it makes a good impression. The argument could even be made that anonymous charity is done for self-satisfaction, although that is a tad too cynical for my tastes. One also has to weigh up the punishment for being caught, the risk of being caught, and the downside of not being able to do what one wants. In the case of trespassing for the sake of urban exploration, I'd tend to ignore laws for places such as abandoned buildings, as its unlikely to end badly, and the security is unlikely to be high. On the other hand, the chance of being caught stealing from a store/home is significantly higher. It's a bad idea all around. Also, it's generally considered immoral, so then there's also the guilt to factor into it.
Then lessen the "hindrance of being refused". This is where the benefits of having learned to cope with loss and rejection come in. I tried it. I found it far more fruitful than pondering over questions like these. Then not asking permission and just assuming that you are allowed to do whatever the hell you weren't asking permission for. You're telling this to me, who made a thread and a poem about it some time ago? No, you'd be right. And there you have it. We don't think that way, or like to think that way, because it's not to our "taste", as you so charmingly put it. Overanalysis often leads to cynicism and nihilism and that's a state where you'd rather not end up, believe me. I've been there, and I've come back. I feel happier ever since I conveniently forget that we're all but a bunch of molecules floating about. Do you really need any more explanation than that? Ah yes, the guilt factor. You feel bad, so you don't do it. And when you would do it, I suppose you'd feel guilty because you did it. XD And thus, the circle is closed. Why would you feel guilt if you're the centre of your own world anyway? And more importantly, why do others apparently feel less guilt or no guilt at all when they choose the other option? Guilt isn't evenly divided amongst us, you know this as well as I do. Not asking permission might make one person feel guilty while having no effect on another. We both know this to be true, but this completely destroys the point of your "seeing other's takes on it", since they are very likely to give an answer that isn't applicable to you. Either way, if you want my "take" on it, I say learn to cope wth refusal, rejection and loss. It'll come in handy later in life, one way or another, at least more so than puzzling over the pros and cons of asking permission imo.
I'd rather learn how to succeed, as opposed to giving up. Certainly, there's a place to concede, but in times when you aren't willing to concede, you have to make the choice between asking permission, or not. I suppose there is merit in getting more tolerance for being refused, but there will always be that one point which you refuse to concede on, and that's when this problem comes in. Naturally. Which is one of the merits of asking permission. It's a balance between the risk of being caught and the probability of being refused. If the probability of being refused is low, then permission is usually better. Did you? I either missed it, or forgot it. Either way, something happened to change your mind? Definitely not a nice mindset to get into. Even so, there's another perspective that can be taken on the charity issue. People donate anonymously to get the self-satisfaction, but simply the fact that they get satisfaction from helping others is enough to say that they are being generous, and are considering others. It's impossible for someone to be truly selfless in the sense that they act so that they don't get satisfaction, but I'd argue it's still selfless if they get satisfaction as a side effect of helping others. Two possible reasons. Guilt is due to conditioning, and while I can acknowledge mentally that I am the centre of my world, I still have my subconscious to argue with in that regard. The other is that guilt is the fear of being caught and punished. Others feel less guilt, because they're not going against their conditioning, and/or there's no fear of being caught. I initially started the thread expected utilitarian replies, as opposed to moral replies. Even so, it gives me the viewpoint of others, and it's possible that it will alter my moral code. So even if it isn't applicable to me, I get to understand how others think, and it's possible that I'll change my viewpoint entirely. Unlikely, but not impossible.. Okay. So from you, I've got the idea of tolerance. Not a bad idea in most cases, but sometimes it isn't acceptable to do nothing.
Giving up is not the same as learning to deal with defeat. There will be occurences in life where you will suffer loss without you being able to counter it. The death of an acquaintance would be a fine example. What I mean to say is, learning to put loss (refusal and rejection) into perspective is a skill that you won't regret having, regardless of whether it can be used in any given situation or not. The fact that it can lessen the hindrance of being refused is only one facet of it. Yes, but it's a personal experience. It wouldn't be relevant for this discussion. That is, assuming that the self-satisfaction is the side effect, instead of the other way around. But let's try not to digress on this matter. Didn't see that coming, but very well. One utilitarian argument in favor of asking permission would be that there is a reason for being refused or turned down that you didn't think of. (I admit that this is one of the primary reasons that I ask permission in the first place.) You cannot eat the berries from the bush in the garden because they are poisonous. You will not inherit your father's corporation if you're gay because he fears that the company will not be passed down in the family after your generation. And so on. Whether those arguments always make sense is another can of worms, but I found that in most cases, they're at least worth listening to.
Taking is such an easy thing to do. But why choose an easy path? To better oneself they must make each goal more difficult, more treacherous than the last. How can we be glad with satisfactory when greatness is within all our grasps? Asking permission, though a formality, is essential part of the social stability of a group. Without it, how can we trust someone? If all they do is for themselves, then do they even care for others? I wouldn't want to be around that type of person or even want to be them. Selfishness is not the way I work.
people are talking as if they aren't just living their life for themselves...your nice to people to avoid making life harder being surrounded by people that hate you...people do good things for the reciprocal good things that will be done back...and in the case where nothing good is done back they either assumed something good was going to occur for them or you return to the first thing i said... your mind is not made to consider others feelings...its built to consider your standing in the social pecking order...other peoples feelings are just indicators of this to you...but in order to make yourself feel better for being so inwardly motivated your conditioned to believe your doing it out of empathy... in the case of humans being kind to animals where the animal can't really convey any sort of social pecking order status...people who are nice to them are such because they were raised to be that way...in the case where they weren't raised this way...they met someone in life they want to "impress" so to speak... and monkey king...your statement is silly...no one will pick the more difficult road just to better themselves...if they do they are a fool...and also society is just a construct built by the weak to protect themselves from the strong...none but the weak owe anything to society least of all care if they trust them or not selfishness is how you and all of us work and it's the great motivator of all lives...you'll live selfishly and also die as such...in the case of dying to save someone else...you just wanted to be remembered for something after your dead...which in its very nature is a selfish motivation lie to yourself all you want...this is what we are...and we are base
Good post. Would be better if every set of ellipses was replaced with a single period. It's a cynical viewpoint, and one that's difficult to argue against. Perhaps I should make a thread on it, or find Styx' old one.
Then call me a fool, ignorant of what the world is all about. But your view is so pessimitic about our ability to act selfless. Is it not selfish to better oneself? Thereby becoming stronger than those around themselves and, as a result, wield more power over the weak? After you control the week, you can be the tyrant you claim is the human base. Selfishness is bad not only because of moral implications but also from a social point of view, being as we are social creatures, how long would we be able to cope without an intimate human interaction? Without proper trust or care? Will we be beasts with nothing better to do then take? Whether it is our base or not, it is not the only thing that encompasses us, we are both selfish yet compassionate as creaturers, and it's the individuals choice to follow either path, not becasue we are born that way.
