Conversely, if you decide not to act, does that not affect other people? Do you not have an obligation to the people you impact through your lack of action, and make no mistake, lack of action can have a very strong impact.
Yes.
And I happen to believe that the crux of that obligation is to make sure that you know what you are doing to the best of your ability.
The bottom line, as you stated so well, is that there are no absolutes. I would rather be damned for doing than for not.
Actually, the theme of my post was that most people don't spend the time to gather all the info possible before running off half-cocked. The ex I mentioned was really good at doing things like talking to one person in a conflict and then going to the other person in the conflict and laying down the law about How Things Are. I thought that was incredibly arrogant of him.
There are no absolutes I agree, and sometimes you just have to hold your breath and leap into the fray. My confusion is mostly directed at people who would rather do that with little or no information rather than take the time to gather what little is available to guide their actions.
And sometimes we have to face the fact that our contribution is not wanted and that the best "action" we can take is just to shut up and mind our damn business. If the person isn't actually on fire at that particular moment, you have the time to sit back and see where things are going first and to find out when and where your support is needed or is welcome.
All those pro-lifers who wave mutilated baby posters at women visiting clinics are genuinely trying to help. What they are not getting is that their help is not needed. (I'm aware this is another extreme example, but I'm trying to illustrate a point that anybody on my f-list is likely to get.)
no subject
Yes.
And I happen to believe that the crux of that obligation is to make sure that you know what you are doing to the best of your ability.
The bottom line, as you stated so well, is that there are no absolutes. I would rather be damned for doing than for not.
Actually, the theme of my post was that most people don't spend the time to gather all the info possible before running off half-cocked. The ex I mentioned was really good at doing things like talking to one person in a conflict and then going to the other person in the conflict and laying down the law about How Things Are. I thought that was incredibly arrogant of him.
There are no absolutes I agree, and sometimes you just have to hold your breath and leap into the fray. My confusion is mostly directed at people who would rather do that with little or no information rather than take the time to gather what little is available to guide their actions.
And sometimes we have to face the fact that our contribution is not wanted and that the best "action" we can take is just to shut up and mind our damn business. If the person isn't actually on fire at that particular moment, you have the time to sit back and see where things are going first and to find out when and where your support is needed or is welcome.
All those pro-lifers who wave mutilated baby posters at women visiting clinics are genuinely trying to help. What they are not getting is that their help is not needed. (I'm aware this is another extreme example, but I'm trying to illustrate a point that anybody on my f-list is likely to get.)