Wednesday, April 15, 2009

The System

Once, when I was asked why there are rules, I realized something that astounded and scared me at the same time.

My best answer-'So we can follow them'.

I mean, apart from the 'goody two-shoes' explanations involving rules being a moral code of conduct to do with right and wrong, or rules being enforced so people can become conscious citizens of a country or a zillion other frivolous reasons I can think of, I can't come up with one solid reason for rules to be established and enforced in each institution or organization or country for that matter.

The people who do follow rules generally do for their loyalty towards the cause or because they don't have a valid reason not to, I mean, that would be more of a case of nothing better to do.

The ones that don't can ever so easily be hypocritical and just say the same stuff I am saying, the only difference being that I can't see any reason why I follow rules either, but I still do most of the time, in spite of bending them here and there for reasons that are beside the point.

The point of the matter here being that law and order and everything to do with governing or running a country involves rules and regulations and enforcement of these rules are done, well, let's just say reasonably satisfactorily enough. Although people follow the rules for fear of being penalized for not following them, and mind you, the penalties can be quite severe, there aren't many people I know who would raise a hand when asked whether they have always followed rules and whether they can justify why they did.

Not to be cynical or unfairly critical either, but I'd really like to see someone step up and prove me wrong.

Peace.

10 comments:

Respectful Disagreement said...

Rules may not be "necessary" but i do feel some rules ARErequired in the modern context.. It jsut cant be a free for all can it? then there will be hooligans who would streak around just for the fun of it..

Aditya said...

that still doesn't tell me why rules are necessary.

because there will be hooligans who would streak around for fun? that's more like an explanation as to why rules can not not be there, not why they should

Respectful Disagreement said...

doesnt "can not not be there" qualify as reason enough for them to "be there".. Not that i am all for rules or anything.. but i am of the general feeling that rules which do not stamp on the cultural freedom of man as well as cater to some sanity prevailing in civilisation are "required"..

Aditya said...

Technically, no, it does not, unless of course you believe in doing something because you 'can't not do it', rather than doing it because you 'want to'. Makes a world of a difference.

Again, i don't particularly disagree with what you are saying, but come on da, don't you get what i'm trying to say here?
It's not 'Rules suck' or 'hate rules', I just can't see why rules ARE!

gayathri said...

u think rules don't make any difference?? in foreign countries they've a RULE not to dirty public roads and v do not have that in India...you can c d difference for yourself ryt...if the condition of our country is like this in spite of all the stupid rules v have,just imagine what it'd be like without these rules...

Ryan said...

You know why rules should be there? So that what one person does, doesn't cause discomfort to the others. As long as this is satisfied, you don't HAVE to follow rules. Why should the traffic keep left? So that everyone knows how the other will go. Why do we hear helmets? So that we can be safe. You're confident of your driving prowess? Fine then don't wear one. But that doesn't mean they are confident of your driving skills as well. So they fine you.

Just take a minute and imagine how the world will be if everyone was allowed to vote?

Rules ARE, the same way the Everest IS, or how House MD happened. :P

Aditya said...

@Sharan,
fair enough :)

Aditya said...

@ gayathri, I didn't say rules don't make a difference, just that it would be so much more meaningful if you wanted to follow rules for a reason that stood by itself, not having to be a counter-argument.

though, like Sharan said, Rules ARE. Period.

Respectful Disagreement said...

@sharan... mokkai..

exactly the point i was trying to say though.. prolly dint give you the EXACT case studies involved.. couldnt put it through well i suppose..

Ryan said...

I see you respectfully disagreed :P