zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,865
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 9, 2012 7:36:12 GMT -5
Actions speak louder than words.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 8:40:10 GMT -5
I agree that you don't treat them in the same manner, but not because of intent. And I have a really hard time with your example because no one I know would hurl a glass of milk into the wall. It's a bad analogy for me because I don't deal a lot with that sort of extreme. So say both situations end up with spilt milk, one being the result of some passive-aggressive feelings toward me. Do I worry about "intent" or just clean up the milk? And I do deal with this every day. One kid has a smart way of talking to everyone (always including the parents). Another kid doesn't. Do I let kid A talk to me like that just because he/she doesn't "mean" anything by it? No, I have to say, "You cannot use that tone to talk with me." Intent doesn't matter. Why is that a "bad example"? I am using the same end result (broken glass of milk) with two ends of the spectrum and the motive behind it. I think it is a very good example. As i said, there are varying degrees and we treat people accordingly. And, you can respond to the people in your live however you wish. For me, the intent is an important component to consider. If you don't choose to consider that, that is up to you. And, I don't see much difference between a friend passively aggressively dumping and breaking a glass of milk versus hurling it against a wall. Same type of intent in my opinion in that case versus bumping it with your elbow. So, i guess you are saying if someone hurled the glass in your home, that you would then just shrug and go clean it up as if it was no different than them accidentally bumping and spilling it? Not sure of your point.
|
|
The J
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 11:01:13 GMT -5
Posts: 4,821
|
Post by The J on Jun 9, 2012 9:04:49 GMT -5
I agree that you don't treat them in the same manner, but not because of intent. And I have a really hard time with your example because no one I know would hurl a glass of milk into the wall. It's a bad analogy for me because I don't deal a lot with that sort of extreme. So say both situations end up with spilt milk, one being the result of some passive-aggressive feelings toward me. Do I worry about "intent" or just clean up the milk? And I do deal with this every day. One kid has a smart way of talking to everyone (always including the parents). Another kid doesn't. Do I let kid A talk to me like that just because he/she doesn't "mean" anything by it? No, I have to say, "You cannot use that tone to talk with me." Intent doesn't matter. Why is that a "bad example"? I am using the same end result (broken glass of milk) with two ends of the spectrum and the motive behind it. I think it is a very good example. As i said, there are varying degrees and we treat people accordingly. And, you can respond to the people in your live however you wish. For me, the intent is an important component to consider. If you don't choose to consider that, that is up to you. And, I don't see much difference between a friend passively aggressively dumping and breaking a glass of milk versus hurling it against a wall. Same type of intent in my opinion in that case versus bumping it with your elbow. So, i guess you are saying if someone hurled the glass in your home, that you would then just shrug and go clean it up as if it was no different than them accidentally bumping and spilling it? Not sure of your point. It's a bad example because the question is "action" versus "intent", not "result" versus "intent".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 9:08:13 GMT -5
Action - Breaking something. Intent - Accidently breaking something vs purposefully and deliberately breaking something. Good example.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 9:17:18 GMT -5
No, I'd call his (or her) parents to come get him. If an adult behaved this way, he or she would no longer be welcome in my home. That's pretty much without exception. It's a bad example because the actions are at such extreme ends of the spectrum. Intent is rarely that crystal clear. That's why the passive-aggressive example is better. You can rarely "prove" intent in a case like that. So you deal primarily with the action. I'll concede that the role intent plays varies by personal philosophy.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Jun 9, 2012 9:24:32 GMT -5
Most of you would agree that I have very very low tolerance for excuses. However, I think intent matters greatly.
My first "real" job as an accountant I misstated our Financial Statements by hundreds of thousands of dollars. If you saying intent doesn't matter, I would have been going to jail for SEC fraud, bc our shareholders got the wrong info.
Lena
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Jun 9, 2012 9:29:26 GMT -5
Another example - on stealing. If you are staying at my house and grabbed something of mine by mistake when packing, the end result is the same if you took it on purpose. However, the intent, or lack thereof makes A HUGE difference between my trusting you or not.
Lena
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 9:35:12 GMT -5
No, I'd call his (or her) parents to come get him. If an adult behaved this way, he or she would no longer be welcome in my home. That's pretty much without exception. So, in other words, you consider the INTENT? ;D
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 13:21:24 GMT -5
No, I'm considering the action.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 6:51:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2012 13:32:08 GMT -5
No it's not. One threatened me, one surprised me. Not the same at all.
|
|
8 Bit WWBG
Administrator
Your Money admin
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 8:57:29 GMT -5
Posts: 9,322
Today's Mood: Mega
|
Post by 8 Bit WWBG on Jun 9, 2012 13:49:02 GMT -5
It all depends on whether you are the catalyst or the victim. Its easy to dismiss intent when you are the one who is hurt. Its easy to expect someone else to dismiss their pain when your intent was pure.
There is also a missing piece to the puzzle: for lack of a better word, lets call it the quality of the planning. There are cases where the action itself COULD have worked, but it was not thought out. (Ex. hiring a contractor, but failing to check references and then getting hosed).
Now if we are talking about repeated incidents where the stated intent is CLEARLY unachievable through the action (ex. I want to lose weight, but I eat pasta with bread and veg in front of the TV every night) then yeah... words of intent are not worth the air that carry them.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Jun 9, 2012 14:02:11 GMT -5
But usually the situation doesn't end with the action - but with the other person's response to their action.
I'll use your example - so someone accidentally sticks your sweater in their luggage. After unpacking, most people will either: 1) call you up and say "Oh I'm such a ditz, I grabbed your sweater by mistake! I'll Fedex it to you this week." or 2) say "Hey, free sweater!" and keep it. To me, 2) is equivalent to deliberately taking it.
If someone is honest, fesses up to their mistake, and corrects it, intent matters. If someone does something - purposefully or not - and hides it, makes excuses for it, continues it, or justifies it, only the action matters.
If it's something that can't be corrected - say a privacy violation that leads to someone losing their job, or killing someone with your car - I'd have to argue intent doesn't matter. To me, no matter how pure someone's intentions, if the action is irrevocable, intent doesn't make much difference. But most real-life examples are not that extreme.
|
|
cronewitch
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:44:20 GMT -5
Posts: 5,974
|
Post by cronewitch on Jun 9, 2012 18:41:50 GMT -5
But usually the situation doesn't end with the action - but with the other person's response to their action. I'll use your example - so someone accidentally sticks your sweater in their luggage. After unpacking, most people will either: 1) call you up and say "Oh I'm such a ditz, I grabbed your sweater by mistake! I'll Fedex it to you this week." or 2) say "Hey, free sweater!" and keep it. To me, 2) is equivalent to deliberately taking it. If someone is honest, fesses up to their mistake, and corrects it, intent matters. If someone does something - purposefully or not - and hides it, makes excuses for it, continues it, or justifies it, only the action matters. If it's something that can't be corrected - say a privacy violation that leads to someone losing their job, or killing someone with your car - I'd have to argue intent doesn't matter. To me, no matter how pure someone's intentions, if the action is irrevocable, intent doesn't make much difference. But most real-life examples are not that extreme. One Christmas Day I got a gift with a charger and plugged it in at my brother's house. When I got home I had two chargers one that fit my gift and one that didn't. I called my SIL and said I had one that wasn't mine, she said she was glad I called because they had looked everywhere for a charger for someone else. Taking it wasn't stealing, I didn't even want it and wouldn't steal if I did want one. I would be shocked if she was mad about me taking it. Accidents are entirely different from something done on purpose.
|
|
Waffle
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,391
|
Post by Waffle on Jun 9, 2012 18:54:04 GMT -5
I think intent matters in most things. Let's go back to the birthday card example. If husband meant to get a card but didn't - wife has no birthday card. If husband didn't get wife a card because he decided cards are a stupid waste of money and he doesn't care that wife wants a card - wife still has no card. The intent between those same two actions (no birthday card bought) is very different and I would think that would matter to most people.
|
|
sunshinegal1981
Established Member
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 12:40:31 GMT -5
Posts: 373
|
Post by sunshinegal1981 on Jun 11, 2012 0:40:31 GMT -5
Clearly no one from the "intent doesn't matter, the important thing is the end result" camp has ever donated money to charity. Whether the funds are used to help one-legged orphans in Cambodia, or to finance someone's drug habit (or my shoe-shopping habit) shouldn't matter because the end result is the same -- less money in your wallet. (So, if you are in the 'intent doesn't matter' category, rather than giving to charity this year, please PM me for my paypal account details.)
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 11, 2012 6:56:08 GMT -5
I don't care about "intent"...if you take my stuff, I am going to be pissed and I am going to make sure you pay for doing it. I will not buy into your "I had to do it for the children' sob story. If a child is hungry I will gladly feed them....ask me. hell, I feel like I feed half the neighborhood kids the way it is. And if you steal money and say it is to feed your children, I will not believe you adn i will assume it is for your meth/coke/heroin/hookers and blow habit.
I also do not make personal loans EVER because I hold a grudge and will hate you until the day you die if you do not pay me back. It is just better all around if I pretend to be broke and don't lend it out.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 11, 2012 6:57:39 GMT -5
I think intent matters in most things. Let's go back to the birthday card example. If husband meant to get a card but didn't - wife has no birthday card. If husband didn't get wife a card because he decided cards are a stupid waste of money and he doesn't care that wife wants a card - wife still has no card. The intent between those same two actions (no birthday card bought) is very different and I would think that would matter to most people. not to me...my husband had 365 days to buy me a card...it doesn'tmatter if he planned to or not, he didn't. And honestly, I would much prefer a handwritten note from teh heart instead of paying $6 or more for someone else's words. But I god damn want it when i wake up on my birthday
|
|
Formerly SK
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 27, 2011 14:23:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,255
|
Post by Formerly SK on Jun 11, 2012 8:43:42 GMT -5
Interesting issue. I've been a Watergate nerd for most of my adult life and have always held Deep Throat up to be a hero. Even after we learned it was Felt, I discounted the fact he was FBI (and even more bound not to leak info) because I thought the reasoning (save the presidency/country from Nixon) was a good enough reason to break the law and code of your employer.
I just now finished a book which goes into Felt's reasons for leaking and they had nothing to do with Watergate. It was all about seizing power in the FBI - it was just a coincidence that Hoover died a few weeks after the break in. Basically, Felt used Watergate to embarrass Nixon and the FBI so he could get nominated to replace Hoover - it had NOTHING to do with being moral or disgusted by Nixon's behavior.
This news has completely changed my viewpoint of Felt. Same actions but different intent. So I guess this puts me squarely in the intent column.
|
|
Firebird
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 12:55:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,448
|
Post by Firebird on Jun 11, 2012 8:57:57 GMT -5
If you take someone's sweater by accident, you're going to return it upon discovering your mistake (unless you then decide to steal it). If you take it on purpose, it's not going back (unless you reconsider).
So one scenario ends with me getting my sweater back, and the other doesn't. Do I care what you intended to do with the sweater? No. Even if you wanted to steal it but had a change of heart, no harm done. And in the other scenario, even if you originally took it by accident, not returning it for WHATEVER reason means I no longer have my sweater.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Jun 11, 2012 8:59:52 GMT -5
If you take someone's sweater by accident, you're going to return it upon discovering your mistake (unless you then decide to steal it). If you take it on purpose, it's not going back (unless you reconsider). So one scenario ends with me getting my sweater back, and the other doesn't. Do I care what you intended to do with the sweater? No. Even if you wanted to steal it but had a change of heart, no harm done. And in the other scenario, even if you originally took it by accident, not returning it for WHATEVER reason means I no longer have my sweater. The fact that you even THOUGHT of stealing from me would piss me off...the fact that you reconsidered wouldn't make me change my opinion of you. If you stole from me and returned it, again...you still stole from me. Accidentally taking something is different...I've done it and returned the item with a big apology when I realized I had taken something that didn't belong to me.
|
|