The Role of Rules
What is a Rule?
Starting with the basics, a rule is defined as a one of a set of either explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a sphere. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as an accepted procedure, custom, or habit. Both definitions imply that it is within the definition of a rule that its constituents must understand and accept it. A rule is not a rule if it is not adhered to. But why do we adhere to them and when it was decided that man needed rules is far more telling of an explanation.
Why do we follow Rules?
Thomas Hobbes theorized that all men are born into a state of nature where we are all equal. As equal beings, we are each the deciders of our own lives and the definers of our own whims. But here lies the problem: if each man has a different definition of good and bad in the same society, chaos is inevitable. And furthermore, in the state of nature where all men are equal, we are all equally vulnerable to each other and equally capable of hurting each other. Hobbes believed that the only way to regulate a society fairly for all is for each of us to give up our authority of definition to a single Leviathan and him, her, or them acts as the sole definer of justice. A society is at its safest when all of its citizens adhere to the same rules. Hobbes theorized that by agreeing to live within a society, the citizen is thus agreeing to abide by its ruler and rules. This is the idea of the social contract, an implicit agreement among members of a society to cooperate in the interest of the greater good.
What is the problem with Rules?
Rules tend to follow trend, but are often behind technological advances.
There also exists the issue of mis-communication. Dr. Dale Dwyer suggests that many of the covenants in place in society are written in a language most of its citizens can’t understand. He writes, “It is quite common for employee handbooks to be written far above the reading level of the very employees for whom they are written,” (Dwyer, 2011). These handbooks fail to what they are primarily designed to do: clearly communicate behavioral expectations, suggesting that applicants enter a professional covenant with employers under false or misleading pretenses. Yet, these polices still apply to all employees regardless of their comprehension of them. All employees are still expected to abide.
The problem with most organizations, such as schools, is they appeal to polices of deontology but deontological ethics works best with hierarchies where subjects cannot object. Deontology is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, not the resulting consequences or the character and habits of the actor (Mastin, 2008). Mark Allman asses that the strengths and weaknesses of deontological ethics in Who Would Jesus Kill? : War, Peace, And the Christian Tradition. He writes, “The strength of deontological ethics lies in its clarity – the rules are the rules. [But] Deontological ethics also tends to be rigid: it can’t accommodate times when its applicable or even required to break the rules (such as speeding to the hospital); it fails to address what ought to done in new or imagined situations; it often gets more and more complex as new situations arise,” (Allman, 2008). Seems like quite a few limitations...
Starting with the basics, a rule is defined as a one of a set of either explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a sphere. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as an accepted procedure, custom, or habit. Both definitions imply that it is within the definition of a rule that its constituents must understand and accept it. A rule is not a rule if it is not adhered to. But why do we adhere to them and when it was decided that man needed rules is far more telling of an explanation.
Why do we follow Rules?
Thomas Hobbes theorized that all men are born into a state of nature where we are all equal. As equal beings, we are each the deciders of our own lives and the definers of our own whims. But here lies the problem: if each man has a different definition of good and bad in the same society, chaos is inevitable. And furthermore, in the state of nature where all men are equal, we are all equally vulnerable to each other and equally capable of hurting each other. Hobbes believed that the only way to regulate a society fairly for all is for each of us to give up our authority of definition to a single Leviathan and him, her, or them acts as the sole definer of justice. A society is at its safest when all of its citizens adhere to the same rules. Hobbes theorized that by agreeing to live within a society, the citizen is thus agreeing to abide by its ruler and rules. This is the idea of the social contract, an implicit agreement among members of a society to cooperate in the interest of the greater good.
What is the problem with Rules?
Rules tend to follow trend, but are often behind technological advances.
There also exists the issue of mis-communication. Dr. Dale Dwyer suggests that many of the covenants in place in society are written in a language most of its citizens can’t understand. He writes, “It is quite common for employee handbooks to be written far above the reading level of the very employees for whom they are written,” (Dwyer, 2011). These handbooks fail to what they are primarily designed to do: clearly communicate behavioral expectations, suggesting that applicants enter a professional covenant with employers under false or misleading pretenses. Yet, these polices still apply to all employees regardless of their comprehension of them. All employees are still expected to abide.
The problem with most organizations, such as schools, is they appeal to polices of deontology but deontological ethics works best with hierarchies where subjects cannot object. Deontology is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, not the resulting consequences or the character and habits of the actor (Mastin, 2008). Mark Allman asses that the strengths and weaknesses of deontological ethics in Who Would Jesus Kill? : War, Peace, And the Christian Tradition. He writes, “The strength of deontological ethics lies in its clarity – the rules are the rules. [But] Deontological ethics also tends to be rigid: it can’t accommodate times when its applicable or even required to break the rules (such as speeding to the hospital); it fails to address what ought to done in new or imagined situations; it often gets more and more complex as new situations arise,” (Allman, 2008). Seems like quite a few limitations...
Allman, M. (2008). A Crash Course in Christian Ethics. In Who would Jesus kill?: War, peace, and the Christian tradition(pp. 43-47). Winona, MN: Anselm Academic.
Dwyer, D. (2011, September 7). Rules Are Meant to Be Broken! Retrieved April 9, 2015, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/got-minute/201109/rules-are-meant-be-broken
Mastin, L. (2008, January 1). Deontology - By Branch. Retrieved April 9, 2015, from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_deontology.html
Dwyer, D. (2011, September 7). Rules Are Meant to Be Broken! Retrieved April 9, 2015, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/got-minute/201109/rules-are-meant-be-broken
Mastin, L. (2008, January 1). Deontology - By Branch. Retrieved April 9, 2015, from http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_deontology.html