conuly: (Default)
[personal profile] conuly
O NOES! ITS STUPID! SHE SAVED LIVES!

Here's the thing. Unless her school has a rule that states "discipline for breaking school rules shall be suspended (no pun) if, while breaking the rules, the student does something moderately heroic" the fact is they really have no choice but to punish her for skipping school.

Because she was, in fact, skipping school.

Unless her school is set up very oddly, I imagine that the only way to go home before the end of the day is to go to the office and tell them you're sick, and then wait for a parent to either pick you up or tell them to send you home. And she didn't do that. Which means she was skipping school and, yeah, breaking the rules.

And she says she was sick, but I said that all the time. And half the time I just either came home anyway or else never left home to begin with. I didn't "skip school to come home", I did it so I wouldn't have to go to school. I had no real desire to do anything, so I defaulted to going home and watching TV, or reading, or playing video games. (This all assumes she really did intend to go home, of course - she may have meant to just stop at home and pick something up before going out again, or to take the bus near to home and then do something else. Or maybe she was really sick, I don't know.)

"But she did something heroic!"

Yeah, through coincidence. And despite what everybody over there is claiming, she didn't really "choose" to be a hero. She kinda had that choice thrust upon her, as the other choice was "sit here and get seriously injured or killed, along with the driver and all the little kids". Not much of a choice.

"But don't they cancel out????"

No, they don't. They're two unrelated things. "Sure, he robbed a bank - but he gave some of the money to charity!" It doesn't really work that way, or at least, it shouldn't.

Okay, if she'd skipped school for the specific purpose of committing the heroic deed... maybe. "Yeah, he robbed a bank - but he only did it because it was the only way he'd be able to ransom his wife from the nefarious evildoers, and all the rest of the money went to the poor!"

Or if you said the policy was wrong, that the punishment was too much for the crime, okay. But I really fail to see how a day of Saturday detention is really that arduous. I mean, it might be, but... really? It's probably not.

Date: 2008-04-02 10:20 pm (UTC)
siderea: (Default)
From: [personal profile] siderea
I guess in part I don't see her actions as overly heroic. [...]

Yet either of us could envision a scenario in which a person might have more or less discretion in action. Say, if she had had to run into a burning building or run across the tracks of an on-coming train.

One of the purposes of such rewards is not to condition the actor, but the observers. In rewarding her, the community says, "We prize those who avert disaster," not merely to her, but to the whole community. This is one way how community values are propagated: by making positive examples of them.

So the question is, "What message do we wish to send to others?" It is reasonable to think, "Others may have more discretion in their action; we want to encourage them to the act for the good of others; we shall send a strong message that acts which save others' lives are meritorious."

Date: 2008-04-03 11:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] leora.livejournal.com
I don't think the correct message should be: if you do something wrong, maybe you'll get lucky and have some freaky accident occur near you where you can be a hero and then everyone will forgive you and not notice you were wrong in the first place.

I think that's a crap message.

I prefer the message of: if you do something wrong, it's wrong. And if you do something great, it's great. And you will get the effects of ~both~. So, she should be punished and rewarded, each according to the things she did.

Of course, it's all rather weird for me, because discipline didn't work that way when I grew up. For example, getting punished by the school for lateness worked like this: the rule was be late 3 times and you get a detention. The practice was be late often enough as a really, really good student who is late because she is simply too tired to always get to school on time and they will not write down many of the latenesses, but will write down a small percentage of them, so eventually you will acquire a detention.

Absences worked similarly, except that the number they would record had a cap, so they'd record roughly that number divided by 4 each quarter so that I didn't have too many to be hit by the mandatory held back a grade laws. But then, I was missing more than 20% of my school days in high school and late for many of the others. All of the other solutions would have been difficult.

So, the idea of a school fairly enforcing its rules equally... I find it unlikely. Of course, an argument can be made that getting around bad rules isn't a bad thing.

Also, I got one detention in middle school (totally not my fault, although I was late, but it had to do with my family having moved) and one in high school. Both were very pleasant. In Middle School detention meant that instead of waiting standing up outside (or just barely in the corridor inside if the weather was bad) after my father dropped me off to school way too early on his way to work (because it was the only way he could give me a ride) I instead had to sit down in a classroom inside for the same period of time. A friend of mine who was also stuck going to school early on a regular basis asked if she could have detention too, but they said no, so she had to stand outside in the corridor while I sat at a desk.

My main point - it's all rather silly and nonsensical anyway. And I like to ramble.

Profile

conuly: (Default)
conuly

February 2026

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 2nd, 2026 09:35 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios