[Are social constraints necessary?]

Social constraints are necessary because?



Social constrains are not necessary because...


(ten thousand words or less)

Sorry... I won't do your homework for you.

doh!!!

How about one word or less?

ummmmm....

Social constraints are necessary because humanity, on a wholesale level, is not capable of perfect self control - whether it be through evolutionary, social or individual development.

Lucky: Social constraints are necessary because humans are not capable of self control.

Erimitus: In order to function in a society an individual must have self control (i.e.) be able to control the self.

Why is it necessary for individuals in a society to have self control?

How does having social contracts contribute to self control?

Fail!

We (each of us) have a self.

If the self must be controlled, the who or what does the controlling of the self?

Maybe social constraints are a survival technique!
If I were to punch someone, I would expect it to have a consequence. A returned punch at least.
If I were to steal something I would expect a consequence. Maybe another punch.
Because I am not too keen on being punched I temper my behaviour accordingly.
Social laws work around these natural constraints.

Social constraints are necessary because?


foosyerdoos: Maybe social constraints are a survival technique!

Erimitus: Maybe

foosyerdoos If I were to punch someone, I would expect it to have a consequence. A returned punches at least.

Erimitus: Actions have consequences.

foosyerdoosIf I were to steal something I would expect a consequence; maybe another punch.

Erimitus: yes, before stealing something we consider the possibility of being caught. If caught there is the possibility of punishment. A rule against punching and stealing, the enforcement of that rule, and a punishment for breaking the rule is a social constraint.

Erimitus: The question was, still is, are social constraints necessary and if so why?

We (I anyway) choose not to punch and steal. I make this choice because I fear punishment. If a society did not have constraints, then we (well I) would punch the weak and steal their stuff. There would be no point in my working (being productive) if I could just steal what I wanted and needed, and there would be no point in my working (being productive), if others (who were stronger) could punch me and take my stuff. So, it is not unreasonable to consider the possibility that, the potential for a society without rules (constraints) against punching and stealing being productive and therefore functional would be low. So, in answer to the question, ?are social constrains necessary??, (I) would tentatively suggest, yes they are and the reason that I would give for the necessity of social constrains is that a society without constrains would tend to be unproductive and therefore dysfunctional.

foosyerdoos Because I am not too keen on being punched I temper my behavior accordingly.

Erimitus: I have been punched, and frankly I did not like it and I tend to avoid situations where there is a possibility of my being punched. We are alike in that respect.

foosyerdoos Social laws work around these natural constraints.

Erimitus: I do not understand what you mean by natural constrains. Please explain.

Because otherwise, I would walk up to people, pee on them, and laugh about it.

I(and most people) try and get through the day without being aggressive. I(and most people) also try not to inflame aggression in others. That's not to say that during the course of my life I will not encounter people that i would very much like to punch. I naturally choose to constrain myself from doing so, because as you say, there would be consequenses for any such actions.

The problems start, i suppose, when you feel you have been given permission or justification to act with impunity against another.
This permission or justification could come from yourself,if you feel you have been wronged. From your peers,when they/you feel they have been wronged. Or from Governments, when they feel wronged.

The law is merely there to decide if there was justification or not.
So in that respect, I suppose legal social constraints are needed.

In believe you may have come up with a universal social constraint. There is no society that sanctions walking up to people and peeing on them. (unless the person was on fire of course, then I supose it would be acceptable) Is there an actual rule agianst such behavior? Or is it a second order sancton? And, although I know of no study on the subject, I suspect that the peed upon would not like it and punching might soon follow. Good point.

foosyerdoos Social laws work around these natural constraints.

Erimitus: I do not understand what you mean by natural constrains. Please explain.

F: I (and most people) try and get through the day without being aggressive.

F: I (and most people) also try not to inflame aggression in others.

F: That's not to say that during the course of my life I will not encounter people that I would very much like to punch. I naturally choose to constrain myself from doing so, because as you say, there would be consequences for any such actions.

F: The problems start, I suppose, when you feel you have been given permission or justification to act with impunity against another.

F: This permission or justification could come from yourself, if you feel you have been wronged. From your peers, when they/you feel they have been wronged; or from Governments, when they feel wronged.

F: The law is merely there to decide if there was justification or not.

F: So in that respect, I suppose legal social constraints are needed.

E: When a person is a part of a society, that person is expected to adhere to the rules of that society, and any behaviors by that person, when within that society, must be justified by the rules of that society. When a person behaves in a way that is inconsistent with the rules (norms) of society, then that person is punished, (punched, incarcerated, institutionalized, or tacked up to a cross wondering why he has been forsaken).

E: Social constraints are necessary. They are necessary because without them society would be dysfunctional. Societies have standards of conduct. In an attempt to encourage members of a society to adhere to the society?s standards, those who do not adhere are punished. When we act, the action must be justified by the contemporary region standards of the society in which we are living. (i.e.) When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Las Vegas we still have to follow the rules or we will be punished.

E: It is still not clear to me what you mean by natural constraints. I view social constraints as artificial and many times arbitrary. What would be an example of a natural constraint? (Aside from peeing on people ? i.e. Voiding where prohibited)