Holmes’ assertion that presumption has no place in an intimate relationship highlights some significant issues about how we should deal with others. To a degree, it is good to recognise and respect the limits of tolerance whether it be between friends or married couples. However, there is a difference between refraining from presumption and ignoring one’s companion’s shortcomings. Indeed, it is also important to have frank and open dialogue in interpersonal situations. In a broader sense, the question is asked of society: does politeness or an excess of political correctness lead us to ignore serious error and allow licence to mediocrity and the like?
Without a degree of tact and a respect for interpersonal boundaries, there is a good chance that a friend, spouse or acquaintance could be offended. Indeed, within a spousal context, a hurt look or an angry word can tip the balance. As people mature, they generally pic lip on the dangers of presumption. This is a realisation that even in relationships, there is not unlimited room for criticism. Robert Frost captures this notion by stating that ‘…good fences make good neighbours’. Thus, to avoid hurting another’s feelings, we should remain courteous with people we like, or else, we risk drawing our own criticisms. There are several reasons, however, that courtesy should not prevent individuals from remonstrating with their intimate associates.
If presumption is hurtful in a relationship, then mediocrity or omitting to be frank with another can be equally unhelpful. Indeed, Holmes’s assertion that enemies will sooner enlighten others to their faults is an undesirable event. It would be much more preferable to hear it from a close friend who can consider their criticism and deliver it carefully and charitably. Such honest and frank dialogue between people is a healthy sign of maturity as well as an acceptance that we live in a world full of people- a world we must share.
The third issues relates to the wider society which is increasingly concerned with political correct speech and behaviour. Such concerns play out in situations such as the workforce in which men are afraid to compliment women on their appearance, for instance. In this case, the society has put itself in chains for the sake of not risking conflict. Unfortunately, it is these chains which also can dissuade or prevent us from acting swiftly in the face of a socially-unpleasant situation. Neighbours who dump their lawn clippings in a river flowing through their property should be made aware of the possible threat their activity is posing to biodiversity, for example. However, the ‘polite’ thing to do would be to ignore it. The problem here with this laissez-faire mentality is that abuses can be ignored and the society becomes increasingly permissive.
It is quite clear therefore that a balance must exist between presumption in a personal relationship and ignoring shortcomings. The former risks isolation and resentment while the latter permits mediocrity. Within society, too, there is a nee dfor a stronger resolve in using tact in the real issues, but identifying a problem and naming it when we experience it.
Holmes’ assertion that presumption has no place in an intimate relationship highlights some significant issues about how we should deal with others. To a degree, it is good to recognise and respect the limits of tolerance whether it be between friends or married couples. However, there is a difference between refraining from presumption and ignoring one’s companion’s shortcomings. Indeed, it is also important to have frank and open dialogue in interpersonal situations. In a broader sense, the question is asked of society: does politeness or an excess of political correctness lead us to ignore serious error and allow licence to mediocrity and the like?
Without a degree of tact and a respect for interpersonal boundaries, there is a good chance that a friend, spouse or acquaintance could be offended. Indeed, within a spousal context, a hurt look or an angry word can tip the balance. As people mature, they generally pic lip on the dangers of presumption. This is a realisation that even in relationships, there is not unlimited room for criticism. Robert Frost captures this notion by stating that ‘…good fences make good neighbours’. Thus, to avoid hurting another’s feelings, we should remain courteous with people we like, or else, we risk drawing our own criticisms. There are several reasons, however, that courtesy should not prevent individuals from remonstrating with their intimate associates.
If presumption is hurtful in a relationship, then mediocrity or omitting to be frank with another can be equally unhelpful. Indeed, Holmes’s assertion that enemies will sooner enlighten others to their faults is an undesirable event. It would be much more preferable to hear it from a close friend who can consider their criticism and deliver it carefully and charitably. Such honest and frank dialogue between people is a healthy sign of maturity as well as an acceptance that we live in a world full of people- a world we must share.
The third issues relates to the wider society which is increasingly concerned with political correct speech and behaviour. Such concerns play out in situations such as the workforce in which men are afraid to compliment women on their appearance, for instance. In this case, the society has put itself in chains for the sake of not risking conflict. Unfortunately, it is these chains which also can dissuade or prevent us from acting swiftly in the face of a socially-unpleasant situation. Neighbours who dump their lawn clippings in a river flowing through their property should be made aware of the possible threat their activity is posing to biodiversity, for example. However, the ‘polite’ thing to do would be to ignore it. The problem here with this laissez-faire mentality is that abuses can be ignored and the society becomes increasingly permissive.
It is quite clear therefore that a balance must exist between presumption in a personal relationship and ignoring shortcomings. The former risks isolation and resentment while the latter permits mediocrity. Within society, too, there is a nee dfor a stronger resolve in using tact in the real issues, but identifying a problem and naming it when we experience it.
No comments:
Post a Comment