This is http://www.essayz.com/b0211244.htm Previous-Essay <== This-Essay ==> Following-Essay Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words. {Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.} ========================================================== %LEGITIMATE CRITERIA DISCRIMINATE GROUNDS COMPLAINT+021124 %COERCIVE DISINTEGRATIVE VIOLENT WAR PRISON HELPFUL+021124 %HEALTH RECONCILE DIPLOMAT GRACIOUS CIVIL HOSPITAL+021124 %ILLNESS SICKNESS DISEASE HEALING PEACEMAKERS EVIL+021124 %COMPLEX MULTIPLE CONSEQUENCES MOTIVATION EXPECTED+021124 %INFORMAL HOSTILE ANTAGONISTIC MEAN REVENGEFUL SIN 021124 What are some legitimate-criteria which are helpfully-used in discriminating-between and CONTRASTING integrative-coercive-behaviors and disintegrative- coercive-behaviors? Here the focus is upon CONTRASTING different kinds of COERCIVE-behaviors. Non-coercive behaviors are not among those being CONTRASTED. Among COERCIVE behaviors presumably some are sometimes helpfully-used; and others are rarely if ever used in helpful ways. What are some key contrasts between occasions of helpful-use and occasions of non-helpful-use? "Helpful-use" may be pointed to by words such as: "healthy", "integrative", "reconciling", "diplomatic", "gracious", "civil", "hospital", etc. "Helpful-use" may also be pointed to by words such as PREVENTING: "harm", "destructions", "disintegrations", "violence", "disease", "dis-ease", "illness", "being-ill- at-ease", "crimes", "alienation", "estrangement", "mis- understandings", "ignorance", "prejudice", "injustice", "arrogance", "self-righteousness", "excommunications", etc. A major difficulty in these considerations is that any one "behavior" usually has a multitude of consequences; some of which are "good" and others of which are "bad". How are we to ascertain how to characterize the "net" result of any one "behavior" within any finite volume of space-time about which we can be reasonably well informed on any one occasion? Another major difficulty in these considerations is that most "behaviors" entail more than just one person. Many human behaviors are "relational-realities" which entail a pattern in the development of relationships between and among two or more people. We cannot helpfully point to just one "act" in total isolation from the evolution of the relationships within which some one "act" occurred. Yet another major difficulty in these considerations is that it is often helpful/reasonable to take into consideration the "motivations", "intentions" and "expectations" of the people who have been involved in some one "act". In the absence of gracious consideration unfair CONTRASTS are often made. Yet another major difficulty in these considerations is that the various considerations of an "act" have different consequences --- depending upon whether or not the considerations are private/informal or public/formal considerations. Do the considerations lead to individuals as individuals granting/withholding respect, honor and support --- or do the considerations lead to public agencies imposing/withholding punishments and/or granting/withholding rewards? If it is the latter, are those people who are engaging in the formal responses: hostile, antagonistic, mean, revengeful, etc, --- or thoroughly dedicated to seeking to promote: healing, reconciliation, cooperation, etc? Do the formal responses make matters better or worse? Do informal response make matters better or worse? Who can tell without prejudice/bias? (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================