Social unity and harmony, as Schwartz explains, requires agreement on a general note. To tolerate something is "to allow what is not actually approved", according its dictionary definition. However, there is a strongly negative connotation to the term when it is directed in this manner. Schwartz explains that because of this connotation, while we as individuals are allowing a thought or viewpoint the capability of being viable, “we are being judgmental - we are being disapproving.” (Schwartz, 1996) In that case, then, would it be plausible to argue that while one may be tolerable of other religious beliefs, hobbies, or lifestyles, they are all inferior in comparison to one’s own religious beliefs, hobbies or lifestyles? Schwartz argues that this is not the case, but rather that tolerance is simply another form of acceptance, and in some cases,
For instance, according to Donnelly, Dexter is not the anti-hero that forces the moral ideals. Dexter's character strengthens conservative moral ideals, which offer a clear distinction between ‘’good’’ and ‘’bad’’ violence to a culture that is struggling to rationalize key political and social actions. Dexter has attracted the viewer as an antihero that cares about morality and differentiate between ‘’good’’ and ‘’bad’’. Therefore, this feature can be effective that Dexter is sympathetic to the audiences. According to Murray ( cited in Wilterdink,2015), allegiance is related to the moral evaluation of characters by spectators and it means viewers can either morally identify with an anti-hero, or not.
Geoffrey Leech’s Politeness Maxims In his work, Principles of Pragmatics, Geoffrey Leech introduces the politeness Maxims, which its main aim can be described as minimizing the expression of impolite beliefs in order to simplify communication and construct a friendly relationships with other people. Leech distinguished two main variations of politeness: negative and positive, obviously meaning that the positive behaviour should be maximized while negative minimalized. The theory gives and inside into six maxims of politeness, working as guidelines explaining the behaviour during conversation if the speaker tends to be polite towards the hearer. (Leech, 1983) 1. The Tact Maxim Minimize cost to other, maximise benefit to other.
The most famous and down-to-earth people are those who know who they are and those who accept their weaknesses and flaws. These people go through their life attempting to understand their personality and into realizing how they can hone their personality to suit a certain situation. They obtain positive results from their own journey of self-discovery and acceptance. This paper defines self-discovery and acceptance as discovering your individuality, being who you are and accepting and correcting your flaws. This paper intends to foster an understanding of the positive effects of self-discovery and acceptance and attempt to contravene the negative implications of the same.
Furthermore, there are also threats to one 's face which are consistently called 'face threatening acts '. People generally seek to avoid threatening or damaging someone else 's face and therefore they resort to positive and negative politeness strategies such as being indirect, making an apology, showing friendliness or solidarity. The most rewarding and interesting aspect of this theory is watching how people in certain situations differ from the predictions in regard to their use of politeness strategies, or how differently various nations or cultures use these strategies in the same situations.
to be more polite and without offending someone so that the hearer can accept the point pleasantly. (1981p.45). This phenomenon by expansion dysphemism, is attached politeness through the concept of the face; to be sure x-phemism can be divided in relation to the notion of face and face affront. The function of euphemism is preserving the speaker’s or writer, public image or face in communicative interactions and hence maintaining the social concord in interpersonal relations by avoiding the potential face-affronts that some taboo word expressions may present (Crespo-Fernandez 2015: xi.p. 45-46).
You have heard some of these pithy statements of a personal philosophy. They are catchy but not particularly useful as thoughtful, deliberate guides to behavior. “My philosophy is simple: get good people, tell them what needs to be done, and then let them alone!” “My philosophy can be stated very simply: treat others—boss, peer, and subordinate—just as you want to be treated! Make the world better!” “I can spell out my philosophy in a very few words: demand loyalty, reward excellence, and punish failure!”
By putting oneself in the shoes of the victim, one can realize their needs and try to bring positivity into their lives. In addition, feelings of empathy can lead to picking the most appropriate side in regards to social injustice. Likewise, Wiesel demonstrates his method for resolving these issues by believing, “[one] must take sides [and that] neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim” (Wiesel 1). Wiesel utilizes logos to highlight the value of taking the most suitable stance without being diplomatic. By picking the most valid side, one can inspire others to be as courageous and create a safe society.
In other words, Kant attach an importance to people’s instinct or characteristics, Mill gives weight to promoting happiness and dissolution of the pain. Mill actually believes that people could not survive by only thinking themselves. In other words, people could not become more selfish as much as Kant stated because life force people to give importance to others. Since, they may be succeeding what they desire to do when they help each other on their necessities. Mill defends that people can accomplish individually of aims and closures ought to be considered some portion of their happiness.
This means that people’s empathic responses are modulated based on the evaluation of the behaviour of others, empathising with just individuals and dismissing unjust individuals. This often incites behaviours aimed at aiding a just individual in distress rather than aiding the unjust individual. (Eisenberg and Miller, 1987). Feelings of empathy are appropriate to constraining aggression and other behaviours that are seen as detrimental to others (Feshbach and Feshbach, 1969). Thus, empathy can be considered an essential component of moral development.