The death penalty does not deter people from committing capital crimes.
Lol, tell that to the recipients of such a penalty. Seriously, it certainly does not seem to deter others that come after. Much the same way that my infidelity is probably not going to stop the next person that is starting their affair right at this moment. And don’t we all wish we could step in and whack some sense into that person. I would assert that consequences have to be felt by the person before that person ‘knows’ that was a bad idea. Meaning your consequences for driving over the speed limit today and getting a ticket might not have the same power over me as ME getting a ticket today would. Does that make sense?
Certain obesity does not stop folks from eating the next unhealthy meal when they're hungry.
True. Maybe a different level of consequence? Like this would be mild compared to an affair?
I think our temporary addiction to the sensations of an experience makes us not consider consequences until later.
Ok. The first time I will grant you that. But after you burn you hand the first time on the stove, you CAN figure out that touching the hot stove is a bad enough idea that simply THAT information is enough to deter you. But it did take doing it the first time to really learn it, right?
After all most affairs happen in secret right ? So active waywards clearly have SOME idea that bad consequences might ensue.
Again, I assert that you only ‘know’ what you have actually experienced, so maybe the first time wayward doesn’t get this idea like a FWS does. I have seen several times on this forum where the repeat offenders are considered much worse than the one time offenders. I think that holds true in life in general. Why do people say “Didn’t you learn from the last time?”. I think that is because it is considered worse to have erred and make the same mistake yet again, than to err and figure out that when reality shows up, this is not something you ever want to go though again.
I think what we can do is try to live our lives away from situations where we may be tempted to have an affair again.
And what is the definition of those situations? In my opinion, that can not be boiled down to “don’t work with women” or something of that nature. It is more comprehensive than that.
Its unreasonable to expect that we might never give into temptation again.
I agree, in as much as it is also impossible to call any marriage affair proof. The only marriage that is truly affair proof is the one that doesn’t exist. And that means managing risk. That is what life is anyway, in many areas. Managing risk.
BTW haven't heard from you in ages. I hope that's a good sign.
Frankly, no. Things are not great.
“No consequences for actions = no motivation to change.”
From that I derive that an appropriate influence to behavioral modification is allowing people to reap what they sow. Sound fair? There is, I am sure, I philosophical debate as to what is allowing and what is adding to, but for now, I will limit my definition to the above. For meaning, when I say philosophical debate, I am talking about the gray area difference between consequence and punishment. A consequence for infidelity can be estrangement from family, yes? I think in the gray area, it could possibly be a punishment, because you have other peoples feelings involved. And that varies based on who know how many variables. It is reasonable to assume that bad feelings will be the result of infidelity, but to what degree? Total estrangement? Temporary? Obviously the variables exist because not ALL marriages that come here make it. Some do.
I think you are confusing "punishment" with "consequences".
Oh? Was it the use of the word ‘teach’? or something else. I was pretty certain that I had a good grasp on the difference. A consequence would be would be pain after you cut your finger off. A punishment would be as you describe here
Punishment is the deliberate inflicting of pain or suffering in hopes of teaching a lesson, as in physically abusing a WS.
That said, I still assert that the former fingerless person has certainly ‘learned’ something from their experience. Thus they have been taught.
Consequences are the Natural Result of bad behavior and bad choices, as in: "Gee, my friends and family and co-workers really think I'm a jerk now that they know I lied to my wife to date some office bimbo instead."
I don’t disagree, but to me it still holds some human variability, and I think it is this variability that can convert a consequence into a punishment and vice versa.
Punishment doesn't always help, because it usually involves the inflictor being just as unreasonable and outrageous as the transgressor. Then nobody has a moral leg to stand on.
I think often that can be true. But not always.
Consequences usually do help *when they are allowed to happen*, because it's not the BS who is bringing them about. It's the WS's own actions that do that.
Well, I am not a WS anymore, but I don’t think there is such a vast chasm between the two.
One way to recognize a *F*WS is that they *do* recognize the difference.
Do you think I get it now? Have I reflected an understanding of the difference?