Texto: Ética da Reciprocidade

Ética da Reciprocidade



A ética da reciprocidade é um princípio moral geral que se encontra em praticamente todas as religiões e culturas, e também é encontrado na filosofia, frequentemente como regra fundamental. Esse fato sugere que a ética da reciprocidade pode estar relacionada com aspectos inatos da natureza humana.
A seguir, exemplos de referência à regra áurea nas religiões mais antigas:
  • No Zoroastrismo → Aquela natureza só é boa quando não faz ao outro aquilo que não é bom para ela própria − Dadistan-i-Dinik 94:5
  • No Judaísmo → O que é odioso para ti, não o faças ao próximo. Esta é toda lei, o resto é comentário Talmude − Shabbat 31ª
  • No Confucionismo → Não façais aos outros aquilo que não quereis que vos façam − Confúcio
  • No Islamismo → Nenhum de nós é um crente até que deseje a seu irmão aquilo que deseja para si mesmo − Sunnah
  • No Budismo → Não atormentes o próximo com o que te aflige − Udana-Varga 5:18
  • No Hinduísmo → Esta é a suma do dever: não faças aos outros aquilo que se a ti for feito, te causará dor − Mahabharata (5:15:17)
  • No Cristianismo → Portanto, tudo o que vós quereis que os homens vos façam, fazei-lho também vós a eles − Jesus, no Sermão da Montanha; Mateus 7:12

Reading Time

By Victoria Candland - Friday, March 22, 2013 4:52:00 PM

“Love your neighbor as yourself; do unto others as you would have them do unto you; whatever is hateful to yourself, do not do to others.” 
The Golden Rule

The Golden Rule

What memories do the words of The Golden Rule conjure up for you? A scolding from your mother about why you shouldn’t steal your little brother’s Halloween candy? Guidance from your second grade teacher about why you need to give everyone in your class a valentine? A pep talk from your football coach about why wedgies don’t promote team spirit?

When most of us think about The Golden Rule we usually think about “being nice” to people. We know that we usually get back what we give out. We see The Golden Rule as a kind of cosmic fulcrum that should balance the karma of the world: everyone living ethically and treating people the way they want to be treated. In a perfect world, if everyone lived according to the principles of The Golden Rule, we wouldn’t need to spend millions in tax dollars on judges, court systems, divorce lawyers, prisons, and complicated government policies and procedures.
 Unfortunately, none of us are angels, and as long as people are alive on earth, we’ll experience conflict. Our world will be imperfect, and some people will try to push us around and act like bullies. But, unfortunately, the harder we try to stop kids from acting like bullies, the bigger the problem becomes. The minute someone responds to them like a victim, they’ve gotten what they’ve been looking for.

The question you’re probably asking is, Why? According to Izzy Kalman, a school psychologist and psychotherapist since 1978 and my mentor, “Bullying cannot be reduced by treating it like a crime. The behaviors that are being called bullying today are more appropriately called aggression or dominance behavior, and are part of the fabric of life. The attempt to outlaw human nature is bound to create more harm than good. If laws could make social and interpersonal problems disappear, all we would need to do is pass enough laws and we would have Utopia. The true solution is good psychology, teaching people to use their brains to understand and solve their problems”.


Law of Reciprocity

What psychologists have discovered is that we’re all hard-wired for something called the Law of Reciprocity: I’m gonna treat you the way you treat me. If you’re nice to me, it’s safe for me to be nice to you. We can see the Law of Reciprocity demonstrated in the way we choose friends and treat our enemies. As humans, we tend to hang out with people who are nice to us and make us feel safe and secure. But, if you’re mean to me, it could be dangerous for me to be nice back. I feel like I need to protect myself, and to do that, I need to show that I’m tougher than you.
Most people (except those who struggle with neurological or mental illnesses) don’t feel like being mean to people who treat them with kindness. Returning evil for good makes us feel uncomfortable. If I live life according to the Law of Reciprocity, I’ll treat you like you treat me, and the minute you’re mean to me, I’m gonna send some “mean” right back to you.
But if I live according to The Golden Rule, I gain an upper hand over you by refusing to be a victim and responding in kindness. Doing good for others means I have the power to diffuse their anger and hostility and to break cycles of aggression. When I’m kind to my bullies, they lose power over me because they’re not getting what they want. They’re wired to return kindness for kindness. They lose and I win. In reality, we all win.


Ladakhi People

Unfortunately, too many of our children are living on “monkey island,” in a world where teachers and administrators unwittingly ape the behavior of the bullies they’re attempting to reform.
But it doesn’t have to be that way. For instance, the Ladakhi people of Tibet have created a society where bullying does not exist. Ladakh is a region of the Himalayas adjacent to Tibet, and the people there follow Tibetan Buddhism. The Ladakhi take turns helping one another plant and harvest, and while they have no government, possess no technology, and use no currency except in rare instances, they have everything they need. When people attempt to stir the Ladakhi to anger, their response is, “What’s the point?” Their culture has taught them to refuse to respond like victims. In fact, their deepest insult is to call someone “One who angers easily.”
The Ladakhi do not acknowledge people who get angry; therefore, people who are stirred to anger do not possess power in their society. From infancy, the Ladakhi teach their children to be unmoved by anger and to consider those who are stirred to anger to be the victims of others. They simply teach their children not to act like victims and get angry. In essence, they teach them to live out the principles of The Golden Rule.
And it works.

Why We Don’t Want the Golden Rule to Work

But deep inside all of us a voice niggles that something just isn’t right about this Golden Rule idea. And even if The Golden Rule sounds noble, if we admit it, the idea of responding to our enemies with love and forgiveness ticks us off a bit.
  • We’ve all been bullied. And we’ve all wanted to fling a punch or launch a verbal assault in return. Something inside us is shouting, “Hey, how about a little justice here . . . a little revenge, even.”
  • The idea of science-based anti-bullying solutions sounds good. Why take on the tough work of personal responsibility and love and forgiveness when we can pass the buck to educationally rubber-stamped programs that make the bully the bad guy and let us and our kids off the hook?
  • Anti-bullying programs give us reasons to blame the other guy. We can claim our role as the victim, point fingers, and demand every benefit offered from The Emotional Welfare State we’re living in.
  • Fighting bullies feels moral and makes us feel good. Especially when we’ve invested millions of dollars in the battle. Admitting we’re fighting a losing battle makes us look silly. We’d have to admit our efforts were a failure and start over, and who wants to admit failure?
Aristotle had this all figured out more than two thousand years ago. He stated, “The one thing that no state or government can do, no matter how good it is, is to make its citizens morally virtuous. Moral behavior is a choice and can’t be forced on people. But the anti-bullying movement attempts to do just that: make bullies morally virtuous people.

That’s because their philosophy is based on the idea that bullying is a learned behavior. Kids bully because they learn bullying behavior. Aristotle understood that we’re all imperfect people who treat one another in self-centered ways. One look at our schools, our marriages, our government systems, our courts, our international relationships, our racial relationships, our interfaith relationships demonstrates that we are humans; we’ve all mastered bullying and can take lessons from the Ladakhi of Tibet.
Izzy Kalman has summarized the need for The Golden Rule in our lives and the role of personal responsibility: “If we are to have any chance of achieving a meaningful reduction in bullying, there is one fact we all need to recognize: There is only one person in the world who can get people to treat you well. And that person is you.”

Reading Analisys


Top 10 Vocabulary

1 - ancient = dating from very long ago, very old.

2 - conjure up = to bring a thought, picture, idea, or memory to someone’s mind.

3 - attemp = to make an effort to do something or to achieve something; try.

4 - neighbor = a person who lives near or next to another.

5 - hang out = to spend a lot of time in a particular place or with particular people.

6 - kindness = the practice or quality of being kind, gentle.

7 - niggles = to be preoccupied with details; to find fault continually; fuss.

8 - blame = responsibility for something that is wrong or deserving censure; culpability.

9 - illnesses = diseases or indispositions; sicknesses.

10 - rubber-stamp = to give official approval to something without really thinking about it.

False Friends (Be careful!)

  • balance = a state of equilibrium, harmony in the part of a whole.
  • push = to make someone or something move by pressing with your hands, arms, shoulders etc. ≠ pull = to use your hands to make something move towards you.
  • state = to declare formally or publicly; to give a piece of information or your opinion, specially by saying it clearly.
  • bully = to threaten to hurt someone or frighten them, especially someone smaller or weaker ≠ coffee pot = a container for making or serving coffee.


Words Often Confused

  • experience = experiência (adquirida com a vida)
  • experiment = experiência (científica)
  • fairly = consideravelmente bem (antes de adjetivos ou advérbios − conotação positiva)
  • rather = consideravelmente bem (antes de adjetivos ou advérbios − conotação negativa)
  • go to church = ir à igreja para rezar
  • go to the church = ir à igreja para outro fim (falar com o padre, encontrar alguém, etc.)


Pronunciation Analisys

  • enough = “inâff”
  • tough = “tâff”
  • unwittingly = “anuáitinli”

Spelling Analisys

Os sufixos mais comuns que transformam verbos em substantivos são “-ER”, “-OR” e “-AR”, que significam “a pessoa ou a coisa que faz” ou que está relacionada com”. Por exemplo:
  • to program → programmER
  • to act → actOR 
  • to lie → liAR
  • to read → readER
  • to conduct → conductOR
  • to beg → beggAR 

Vocabulary Flashback 

(Means of Transportation) 


Disponível em: www.shertonenglishpt.com/pt/gramatica/vocabulario-em-ingles. Acesso em: 02 dez. 2013

Grammar Analisys


Possessives and Reflexives

Os adjetivos possessivos modificam as coisas, as pessoas, os nomes, portanto aparecem SEMPRE acompanhados de substantivos. Já os pronomes possessivos devem ser usados com o intuito de ocupar o lugar do substantivo na frase, pois este já fora mencionado antes, já se sabe do que estamos falando, o que torna desnecessária sua repetição e menos cansativa a leitura. Normalmente, ocupam uma posição final e solitária na frase. Observe neste exemplo:
  • This is my (adj.) book and that is yours (pronome) (= your book).
→ ambos indicando posse e diferenciando “livro”
Fique atento, pois tanto os adjetivos quanto os pronomes possessivos geralmente concordam com o possuidor.

  • This is my house. (Esta é minha casa.)
  • That is Peter’s house and this is mine. (Aquela é a casa do Peter e esta é a minha.)
No primeiro exemplo, nota-se que foi utilizado um possessive adjective (adjetivo possessivo) “my”, enquanto, no segundo exemplo, foi utilizado um possessive pronoun (pronome possessivo) “mine”. Como diferenciar o uso de um possessive adjective de um possessive pronoun?
É simples: basta notar que os “possessive adjectives” sempre vêm acompanhados de um substantivo. No exemplo citado acima, “my” vem acompanhado do substantivo “house”. Já os “possessive pronouns” têm a função de substituir os substantivos. No exemplo acima, “mine” está sendo usado para substituir “house”.
São possessive adjectives e possessive pronouns:

  • My book is new. (Meu livro é novo.)
  • Your pencil is under the table. (Seu lápis está debaixo da mesa.)
  • His backpack is brand-new. (A mochila dele é novíssima.)
  • Which pizza is yours? The cheese or the pepperoni one? (Qual pizza é a sua? A de queijo ou a de calabresa?)
The cheese is mine and the pepperoni is hers. (A de queijo é a minha e a de calabresa é a dela.)
Os pronomes reflexivos podem ser usados para expressar:
  • Ação reflexiva: a ação do verbo recai sobre o próprio sujeito.
→ I cut myself. (Eu me cortei.)

→ She combs herself slowly. (Ela se penteia vagarosamente.)

→ After eating, the cat cleans itself. (Após comer, o gato se limpa.)

→ They burned themselves on the fireplace. (Eles se queimaram na lareira.)
  • Função enfática: o pronome deve combinar com aquilo que se está enfatizando.
→ He himself built his house. (Ele mesmo construiu essa casa.)

→ They themselves fixed the dishwasher. (Eles mesmos consertaram a máquina de lavar louça.)

→ We ourselves made this surprise to you. (Nós mesmos preparamos essa surpresa para você.)

→ I myself cut the cake. (Eu mesma cortei o bolo.)
  • Função idiomática: tem-se a intenção de informar que o sujeito praticou a ação sozinho, sem a ajuda de ninguém. Nesse caso, o pronome reflexivo deve vir precedido por “by”.
→ We did our homework by ourselves. (Nós fizemos nosso dever de casa sozinhos.)

→ Bob made this pasta by himself. (Bob preparou esse macarrão sozinho.)

→ She cleaned the house by herself. (Ela limpou a casa sozinha.)

→ They painted the house by themselves. (Eles pintaram a casa sem a ajuda de ninguém.)
Segue abaixo uma tabela com todos os pronomes reflexivos.

*Atenção que o plural de palavras em inglês que terminam com “-f” ou “-fe” normalmente fazem o plural com “-ves”.
Enfim, podemos criar uma tabela com cinco colunas importantes, para facilitar a associação e a memorização: 


Did you Know That?

Existem várias expressões com “ever” (“at any time”), comumente associadas a tempo, mas nem sempre:
  • whatever = everything or anything that…
  • whenever = no matter when…
  • wherever = at, in, or to every place or point which…
  • whoever = any person who…
  • whichever = no matter which…
  • however = no matter how; on the other hand.
  • forever = without end; eternally.
  • never = at no time; in no case.
  • hardly ever = almost never
Já é cadastrado? Faça o Login!