Topic: Vendetta and Society (Read 848 times)

According to recent research it actually appears that humanity was way more social and peaceful (way) before there were real (written) laws. Maybe one should have a look at small tribes that are completely untouched by the so called civilized world.

My personal guess (and really just a guess) is that numerous bad sociological events (see the middle ages) caused society to not be able to respond to it in a good way, because everyone remembers how something went really wrong. Therefor everyone things laws are important, which seems to be wrong, if you take a look on how unwritten laws that in a way are enforced by society (giving certain reactions) are way more closely followed.

Or just things where as a child you hear "No, don't do that".

A lot of cruel things are not, should not and can not be enforced by laws anyway.

One could also think about social animals (that still are more individual than ants for example), like elephants, which when it comes to social structures and also dealing with death, etc. are actually really close to the humans (choose another animals if you want) that usually are kinda peaceful and social when dealing with others of the same species. Same for apes and stuff of course. So, since they are doing so well and humans seem to (genetically) be more social I doubt that the lack of hard punishments really cause problems. Punishment in these cases does not mean to be killed, being robbed of all your belongings or be caged for many years of your life. So I actually doubt that it can change so much more for humans.

This. And are you speaking of actively anti-social behavior, or simply asocial?

I mean, declaring a blood feud because some dude didn't nod to you as he got off the bus seems absurd.

What are some examples of antisocial acts that are not illegal and do not require an existing relationship? I actually can't think of anything beyond trivial "don't hold the door" type of stuff.

Thanks for your opinion, Vitalik.


My concern is mainly for those who commit antisocial acts where a relationship does not exist that would allow for an effective measured social response / reciprocity.

Something like this.  People who commit antisocial acts outside of their social sphere (implying that good relationships are maintained within social sphere).  What recourse is available?  If a direct, non-superficial social relationship doesn't exist between offenders and those who are insulted is there a social consequence to the offender at all?  As for the punishment of social isolation this would require repeated and consistent poor social behavior by offenders.  This would leave unaccounted for a great deal of injustice carried out under specific circumstances.

Another requirement for effective consequence is for retribution to have a consequential effect in the mind of the offender.  I would think we can agree that quite a lot of social injustice is committed by offenders who have no regard for their victims.  No regard implies no social relationship.

Are there real social consequences for all injustices?  I say there are not due to my opinion that with such large populations we are not as socially integrated as needed for social deterrents/recourse.  

So, moving past ineffective social repercussions is my point; Vendetta.  Is there a rightful place for it in society?

Nonviolent harm can, should, and is punished through nonviolent means. If you're mean to everyone, you get socially ostracized. If you reveal people's private information, people stop trusting you, and they might harm you back in the same way. If you cheat on your girlfriend, you risk getting dumped. Reciprocity is a basic mechanism of society in all aspects of life.

Is there a rightful place in society for retribution outside of the confines of the law?


Example.  Does injustice exist outside of the definitions of the law?  Would it then be immoral or at least violate a sense of objectivity for little or no consequence to come to those who commit antisocial acts that harm in ways not defined under person or property?  Does the lack of consequence for antisocial acts promote greater antisocial behavior?