Is it better to "turn the other cheek", or to "stand up for your rights"?

[Max S Cherry]

Is it better to "turn the other cheek", or to "stand up for yourself"?

False dichotomy.

This is not a "false dichotomy" by any means. It is a question posed by a particular individual who may, at his or her leisure, limit the possible courses of actions in desired way.

 

[quatona]

This is not a "false dichotomy" by any means. It is a question posed by a particular individual who may, at his or her leisure, limit the possible courses of actions in desired way.

That´s what´s called a false dichotomy. The person who calls it a false dichotomy sees different courses of actions than the two the person desires to limit the available options to.

 

[Max S Cherry]

That´s what´s called a false dichotomy. The person who calls it a false dichotomy sees different courses of actions than the two the person desires to limit the available options to.

I did not take the question to be a statement of there being only two possible courses of actions. I took the question to be, "Among these two options, which do you prefer?" That you prefer an option not presented does not create a false dichotomy; however, it does create a dichotomy. It just is not false for the stated purposes if I understood the original question correctly.

 

[quatona]

I did not take the question to be a statement of there being only two possible courses of actions. I took the question to be, "Among these two options, which do you prefer?" That you prefer an option not presented does not create a false dichotomy; however, it does create a dichotomy.

So what, in your understanding, renders a dichotomy false - if not the fact that it presents only two options when others are available?

It just is not false for the stated purposes if I understood the original question correctly.

Why would anyone intentionally limit my thinking and considerations that way? Why would anyone present only two options when more are available?

From Wikipedia:
A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, black-and/or-white thinking, the either-or fallacy, the fallacy of false choice, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, the fallacy of the false alternative or the fallacy of the excluded middle) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. (redding added)

Anyway, beyond semantics nit-picking, you got the idea of my first post, didn´t you?

 

[Haloman800]

Jesus didn't turn the other cheek when the house of God was turned into a den of thieves.

However he didn't rush into it either, he took the time to craft his whip.

 

[QueSi]

Is it better to "turn the other cheek", or to "stand up for yourself"?

Turn the other cheek! . After all that's what he taught us.

 

[Cocoafrost]

He who takes up the sword, dies by the sword.

What then would that say of the Apostle Peter?

Those who stand defenseless in the face of a sword die by the sword.

To the OP question:
I think it important to asses your battles carefully. Turning the other cheek can be a solution to a controversy. However, depending on the intent of your adversary if you turn your other cheek to them after they've had the nerve to strike you a first time they'll simply hold you in contempt as one who likes to be abused. And likely accommodate your invitation to do more harm.

Whereas if you are pushed in that way and you strike back with superior force and strike fear into that enemy chances are if they don't respect you after, it's because they clearly were not respectful when they elected to be offensive. In this case the respect is of little import when you deliver the message that you will not be brutalized at their leisure.

This then demonstrates you have respect for yourself. Making the offenders esteem unnecessary.

 

[Haloman800]

What then would that say of the Apostle Peter?

Those who stand defenseless in the face of a sword die by the sword.

To the OP question:
I think it important to asses your battles carefully. Turning the other cheek can be a solution to a controversy. However, depending on the intent of your adversary if you turn your other cheek to them after they've had the nerve to strike you a first time they'll simply hold you in contempt as one who likes to be abused. And likely accommodate your invitation to do more harm.

Whereas if you are pushed in that way and you strike back with superior force and strike fear into that enemy chances are if they don't respect you after, it's because they clearly were not respectful when they elected to be offensive. In this case the respect is of little import when you deliver the message that you will not be brutalized at their leisure.

This then demonstrates you have respect for yourself. Making the offenders esteem unnecessary.

This is the correct answer.

 

[Max S Cherry]

So what, in your understanding, renders a dichotomy false - if not the fact that it presents only two options when others are available?

A statement of there being only two options would, in my understand, represent a false dichotomy.

Why would anyone intentionally limit my thinking and considerations that way? Why would anyone present only two options when more are available?

If someone wants to know your preference between two particular items or courses of actions.

From Wikipedia:
A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, black-and/or-white thinking, the either-or fallacy, the fallacy of false choice, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, the fallacy of the false alternative or the fallacy of the excluded middle) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. (redding added)

I am perfectly aware of the definition, but thank you for showing it. This is not, in my understanding, what the OP was doing. I took the question to be asking, "Of these two options which is your favorite?"

Anyway, beyond semantics nit-picking, you got the idea of my first post, didn´t you?

Yes, I did, and I hope you get the point of my nit-picking. The response to any question that poses an "either or" situation can always be, "False dichotomy." It could be as simple as, "Do you want spaghetti or fish for supper tonight?" Obviously, you could want something else, and in most cases, there are other options: not eating is the simplest. It could be more serious, "Is it better to be faithful to your spouse or sleep around?" Again, other options abound.

Using the false dichotomy as a response to a question that clearly has other options is merely a means for not answering.

This is just my opinion though.

 

[Neochristian]

You can do both. Standing up for yourself concerns the relationship between yourself and another person. Turning the other cheek concerns the relationship between yourself and a burden. When things happen that are at odds with your will, pick up your cross, embrace them, and change your will.