Judgment

Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago to Ask the Gulch
86 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

The bible says "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Ayn Rand says, "Judge and be prepared to be judged." But, where does judgement start and end. How about the guy in the neighborhood who refuses to keep up with the Joneses? He's the guy with the 10 year old clunker in his driveway. How about the woman who dresses like a girl half her age? We make judgments constantly and some we might even act upon. The question then arises as to what do we judge that warrants action and what doesn't?

All Comments

  • Posted by bsmith51 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The first thing I was told in a Judgment Recovery course was the distinction between judgment and judgement.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Sorry, no. The legal claim meaning is just one of several definitions of "judgment". The primary definitions are:
    1. an act or instance of judging.
    2. the ability to judge, make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, especially in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.

    In America, "judgment" is the only acceptable spelling. Many people make the mistake of adding the e, which is also found in British usage. Eventually "judgement" will make its way into an acceptable alternative, along with acknowledgment/acknowledgement and other confusions in the English/American language. If enough people get it wrong, that makes it right.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    my kid was imitating me with a piece of chalk. First stop the fireplace. Second stop a nicorette prescription....I was a week shy of 20 year and up to two packs of Marlboro Reds a day. http://1984.My Orwellian Moment. I'm now six years past average age of death for a military retiree of my age.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    My tale is a bit simpler. As with Snoopy, "It was a dark and stormy night." At around 2 pm a thunderclap woke me up.I staggered to the bathroom and when I came out, I went to my English Ovals, the strongest cigs I could find. It was out. I looked for my back-up Pall Malls. Nothing. I contemplated the ashtray, but there were butts too tiny to light. There was an all night convenience store about a mile down the road. I put on my London Fog coat, shoes, no socks and moved to the door. Just then, as I opened the door, a gust of wind swept rain over me from head to toe, and at the same time lightning flashed. I shut the door. Sat down on the living room couch. And then, I talked to myself: "Its 2 o'clock in the am, I'm wearing a coat over my PJs. I'm wearing loafers over my bare feet. Its raining thunder and lightning in torrents and I'm going out for cigarettes." I'm an addicted fool. Haven't smoked a cigarettes, unloaded my stash of cigars and threw out my pipes. Haven't touched tobacco since 1974.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    One of my friends said he has found the perfect way to quit smoking. His plan which he followed was to single hand his boat to Hawaii with exactly half the normal ration of cigarettes. Some weeks later he called to report arrival. "How did the smoking cure work?"

    "Halfway there I started sailing faster"

    "Three quarters of the way there I was passing up power boats."

    "Seven eighths of the way there I had changed landfall to the nearest port and has been offered a spot on an America's Cup team."

    15/16ths I used the radio and reserved immediate haulout for new bottom paint and a case of Marlboro Reds."

    "I take it the plan didn't work?"

    "What gave you that clue.?"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Following the teachings of Objectivism and the Quotes of AR no ramming your head into a brick wall made of concrete and stupid. Walk away.

    Following the quotes of our training sergeant on the demo range. ANY problem can usually be solved with a stick of dynamite. Some take two or three. Dynamite comes in many forms. Some verbal and some action. Such as turning around walking away with hands thrown in the air saying, "Is that fool still talking to himself? You may insert freaking and exchange him for her or it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Rand was unabashedly anti religion. She saw it as anti-reason and an excuse for coercion. She was disgusted by religions promise of glories after death, thus making any hardship on earth almost an object of reverence. Further, she thought of it as an excuse for wars (God is on our side) which is illustrated by the use of religion by Muslims as an excuse to perpetrate all kinds of horrors. She put forth that wars were the result of following the leads of the mystic (Religion) and/or The Hun (Dictator-Ruler).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Timelord 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Objectivism doesn't deny religion any more than it denies the moon, but I don' t think that's what you meant. Objectivist thought does not allow for the existence of a magical, supernatural being, the existence of whom cannot be proven using the scientific method. (Rand doesn't specify the scientific method but that's how it works out in the end.)

    The presence of or the lack of organization is irrelevant.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Talking about waiters and waitresses: Some years ago, my son and I went to lunch at a fairly upscale restaurant. The tables were filled, but no one was waiting in line. After being seated, we tried for the next ten or fifteen minutes to catch the waiter as he sailed by. We were on our lunch break and had work to do back at the office. Finally the waiter approached and my son said, watch this in a whisper. Watch this.
    Waiter: May I help you?
    Son: Yes, do you have scruples?
    Waiter: I don't think so.
    Son: Will you please ask the Chef if he has scruples.
    So the waiter reluctantly goes into the kitchen and comes back.
    Waiter: No sir, the chef has he doesn't have scruples.
    Son (in a very loud voice): What? No scruples? I won't eat in any restaurant that doesn't have scruples.
    He then gets up and storms out. I had no choice but to follow. We picked up some tacos on the way back to the office.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    PC means Pusillanimous Cavil ...doesn't it?

    I can't take anything seriously that replaces one perceived fault with a worse version. PerSON PerSON is there a PerDAUGHTER I dont THINK so... Wait Person? I don't want to wait I want service. etc. One wonders if they ever opened a dictionary. I've yet to be unable to find a gender non specific version and they don't sound STUPID!

    pu·sil·lan·i·mous
    ˌpyo͞osəˈlanəməs/
    adjective
    adjective: pusillanimous

    showing a lack of courage or determination; timid.
    synonyms: timid, timorous, cowardly, fearful, faint-hearted, lily-livered, spineless, craven, shrinking; More

    Cavil

    il
    ˈkavəl/
    verb
    3rd person present: cavils

    1. make petty or unnecessary objections.
    "they caviled at the cost"

    noun plural noun: cavils

    a. objection seen as petty or unnecessary.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 11 months ago
    This question applies also to the rampage of people against "politically incorrect" comments they claim offend them. Every word and nuance gets parsed and judged for potential offense. It's time to bring back the old principle that "Stick and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me." Provocative language may be rude but not cause for actions, like lawsuits or slugfests, in retaliation for real or imagined insults. By all means judge the source, the attitude, and perhaps ignore or avoid that person in future. But physical retribution to non-physical behavior is a no-no.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsmith51 9 years, 11 months ago
    FYI: There's a difference between judgement and judgment. The latter is a legal claim for debts unpaid.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by sfdi1947 9 years, 11 months ago
    Consideration of superficial observations are not judgement. Both God and Rand, I think, use a higher reference when speaking of judgement. When we try and judge a capital murderer in court, do we truly know what was in that person's mind when the crime against society was committed. In such cases only God can forgive. Rand however was speaking, I believe, of more earthly, human failures, specifically, our tendency to assign more import to things we see, to things that have no import. I guy with a ten year old clunker may be an ace mechanic and the clunker may not be a clunker, just out of date. Does that make the man a bad person or just a damn good mechanic? Does a persons style of dress do more than mark them as different? Many others, look at some American Styles and shudder, revolted by the appearance, but should that be a judgible facet? I think not, therefore: Judge not, lest ye be judged." rather accept the observation as choices you might not want to make.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Right. If what you want negatively affects me, then either you or I must leave. If it doesn't affect me but affects others, that's where judgment comes in.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's fine. No problem at alI. I smoked for 30 years before quitting, so I have an inkling about how you feel. I loved to smoke. If I ran out of cigarettes my wife said I'd probably fire off a gun and suck the smoking barrel. How I quit is a tale for a future post. As to "wrath" I was being sarcastic -- I think.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by illucio 9 years, 11 months ago
    To Judge is an action, for it causes not only an attitude towards something but omissions as well. To Act directly, meaning to file a law suit or to approach and suggest a conversation (two extremes), aren´t necesarilly the only way to go about things. Not acting is, ultimately; an action in itself as well.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    they made 'em better back then, but it took a lot of gas
    to make 'em run. . the jeep gets about 15 whether you're
    pulling something or not. . it's tough, like the Hudson. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It has absolutely nothing to do with a "Wrath" and everything to do with not throwing stones from inside your glass house! I can agree with not doing it near you in an enclosed space but outdoors in an open space you have every right to stay away from me while I smoke. In my own private space, my home or car, you have every right to stay out and walk if you prefer. I don't allow pot or any other drugs in my home or auto but you can do them until your teeth fall out but keep off my roads.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 11 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Your Jeep reminds me of my old Hudson Hornet which was Hudson's attempt at making a compact car. I bought it at 12 years old. It was decked out with all the beautiful Hudson interior features and ran like a top. However, after 25 years in Michigan, with winter salted roads, the car's body started falling apart even though the blasted car kept running. Finally, both bumpers fell off and the floorboard sagged and the carburetor went bppt. My son and I were miles from home. I put a sign on the windshield along with the registration saying anyone who wants it can have it. We walked the two miles home. The next day it was gone.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 11 months ago
    to get serious as some have no sense of humor...

    The two ways are judging. Before facts in evidence are presented and after facts in evidence are presented.m(or acquired and verified.) Pre Judice commonly known as prejudice, and Post Judice.

    Our legal system based at least at one time on morals, values and ethics, Does probable cause exist? Is there reasonable doubt?

    The procedure applies anywhere and to everything. Should be easy.

    Back to the courts as a metaphor. Heidi Fleiss is charged with pandering and with tax evasion. the evidence supports the charges. However the along the way I added some thing to my moral code and ethical standards that wasn't apparent to anyone else.

    Pandering? To whom? One of the co-conspirators was present in court a self confessed active participant. But was not charged. Conclusion the proposed action was not equal it didn't not apply in all similar circumstances it was therefore not useful. Not Guilty!

    As for income tax I wouldn't vote guilty no matter who was being charged. I voted the system of income tax guilty instead. Not Guilty.

    I was not on those juries. But it's an example of warranted action or inaction. Does it meet your moral and ethical standards. Each case is different.

    In a court we're given a way to vote for or against the merits of the law itself. With out the draft in effect we're given a way to support or not support some government and of course the nation. Enlist or walk away. In the court that will be held less than a year from now we have the same duty...to our own moral and ethical standards. We are judging ourselves first and the candidates second. So far...None of the Above meets my standards. How low are yours?
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo