While I cannot really claim to be an avid short story reader, I guess I've always liked the fairy tale, The Three Little Pigs. This is the story of when a wolf blows down houses of straw and sticks and eats two pigs, but then is eaten by a third pig himself when he cannot blow down the pig's house of bricks. I like this story because it has a good moral: karma. The wolf uses his status as a predator to take advantage of the poor little pigs, and this is morally wrong. The third pig gets his revenge for the other two, though, and while some may argue that two wrongs do not make a right, it still teaches the lesson of, "treat others how you'd liked to be treated." For this, my favorite short story is The Three Little Pigs.
A good moral message....interesting. I do have one complaint with your thesis, though. You said: "The wolf uses his status as a predator to take advantage of the poor little pigs, and this is morally wrong." Are you suggesting that the wolf was wrong to attack the pigs? If yes, how do you think he is supposed to eat? Also, you mentioned karma. I'm not so sure this is a "good" message, even by the standards of an altruistic moral system. What you are essentially suggesting is that it is good to teach that there is an inherent revenge-based moral system in the universe. Even if this is true (which it may not be), is it really an ideal trait for a society to have?
ReplyDeleteHa...I like Billy Willy's about the wolf having to eat because it is true that it does have to eat something...
ReplyDeleteBut I'm unsure if I agree about the whole karma thing because I don't see the big deal if you think that way. It prevents taking action I would think, which is good?
First of all, Billy, it is a story meant for little kids who are NOT thinking in terms of the food chain. They see it simply as an immoral act, not an "oh, the wolf is just doing his job." Yes he is, but for the purposes of getting the point across to little kids, it's suffices.
ReplyDeleteIn my post, I do acknowledge that the opposing viewpoint would be that "two wrongs don't make a right," and I can't deny that that's a completely valid argument, and a flaw in the moral of the story. That being said, you can't deny that it teaches "treat others how you'd like to be treated." Like Jess said, it encourages little kids to not act wrongly in the first place.
My point about karma is simply this: is karma really the lesson we want to teach our children? After all, India's caste system was based on this principle, and it turned out to be a disaster. The "golden rule" is not always as perfect of a principle as it seems.
ReplyDeleteAs for the bit about the wolf--yes, children do view it that way. But that also begs the question "should they view it that way?"
I smell another debate concerning "justice" brewing again. As I have stated before, I not so keen with the "eye for an eye" approach, and I do understand Bill's unease that this idea is being subconsciously pushed onto children.
ReplyDeleteMaybe someone should make another post and we should debate it up again?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI will eventually publish part 4 of that debate, but this was not my main concern here. I was simply calling attention to the fact that this story teaches a certain set of morals, not all of which are always good for society.
ReplyDeleteI don't think karma is a bad lesson to teach our children at all. It discourages bad behavior. If I'm not mistaken, it doesn't teach children to directly take action on those acting wrongly, but rather that those who act wrongly will naturally have it come back to them.
ReplyDeleteBut is karma a good lesson? After all, there may be no cosmic justice or karma inherent in the universe--in fact, it seems unlikely that there is. Why, then, should it be taught? After all, it is a very laissez-faire kind of philosophy: "don't worry, what comes around goes around." In some cases, this can be just as bad or worse as teaching revenge.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line is that the story discourages kids from doing immoral acts. I do agree that the story may have some other things that comes with it that are not the greatest lessons, but you have to think about the age of the kids that this story is geared for and how the kids that are listening to the story are going to interpret it. I'd guess that for the most part, the only thing they are really getting out of it is just "be mean = get punished."
ReplyDelete"Immoral acts"...what are those, exactly? Whose definition of immoral are you using here?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I must say it again: WHY is it good to teach children that they will be punished if they do wrong?
Because when kids hear that punishment is a consequence, they will be discouraged from doing it. (this sounds familiar...)
ReplyDeleteTrue, but you still haven't answered the "immoral" question...
ReplyDeleteIn this case, the immoral act was the wolf eating the pig. In reality, is this immoral? No. But again, the kids are not thinking it terms of the food chain. Yes, I guess I will concede that having a man rob a house and then get his robbed back would have served as a better example...
ReplyDeleteBut if that were the case, how would we have a "big bad wolf," "huffing and puffing," or any of that good stuff? :P
Yes, but then aren't you teaching them that what the wolf is doing is immoral?
ReplyDeleteAlso, haven't we come to the conclusion that neither the "rehab" system or the "revenge" system is perfect? Why, then, do you continue to justify the "revenge" system?
Also, why are you so obsessed with the concept of "huffing and puffing" and "big bad wolf"?
Again, the wolf/pig scenario is not the perfect example. I've acknowledged that.
ReplyDeleteI'm justifying the one certain aspect of the revenge system, which is how it dissuades people from acting immorally.
And thirdly, I don't know what you're talking about lol I was just making an attempt at a joke...
But it is impossible to teach one aspect of a system without promoting the whole thing; aren't you still promoting the revenge system?
ReplyDeleteAlso, you keep using the word immoral. Can you define this for me please?
And as for your joke, I guess I was simply a bit slow on the uptake. I get it now.
You know what Billy, fine. We'll make the story end by sending the wolf to rehab. I'm sure that'll make for a great read, especially for toddlers.
ReplyDeleteIf the story had ended with the wolf having to go to rehab, then you could say you are teaching kids that those who commit cruel acts will get off easy in life.
Honestly, I think at this point we can both agree that all I have to do is just put in the link to some of the justice system debates in your blog, because that's what this has turned into (nearly identically). There are pros and cons to both systems, as we have previously discussed, so for me to keep reiterating the pro and you to keep reiterating the con is pretty futile.
Yes, it is somewhat futile. But I think you are missing an important point about the rehab system: The story could end with the wolf going through rehab, forgiving the pigs, admitting what he did was wrong, and showing remorse for what he has done. That sends a very obvious message, and a positive one too, I think.
ReplyDeleteSo basically you're saying the rehab system has the POTENTIAL to be better than the revenge system when AT ITS BEST, which I'm pretty sure we all knew haha. Now how about if the wolf decides he's gonna trick the psychiatrist into thinking he's mentally stable...
ReplyDeleteAnd once again, we're into the justice system debate, where both methods have their respective pros and cons.
Oh well. We may as well end the debate here. But check out my blog--I just published "law and order part 4."
ReplyDelete