are ideas such as "respect" or "being nice" mutually understood, or are they vague?

[devonin]

Originally Posted by Arch0wl

clearly, what is called "nice" or "respectful" varies from person to person, and something like "you should just be nice" is a moral simplification.

any sort of moral code, or rule, or law based on ideas like:

"just being nice" or the converse "don't be a jerk"

"being a decent person"

"respect others"

will be inherently vague, and open to large debate. people's values will change how they interpret these words -- someone who seeks feedback about their body and wants to be flattered will think you are being "mean" if you tell the truth, while someone who wants objective fedback will think lying to spare their feelings is deeply inconsiderate. the vagueness of "being nice" will cause problems later, as there is no common basis to interpret what being nice or respectful means.

So when you want to respect somebody, and they say "Please change this behavior you exhibited towards me, because I don't like it" the vagueness has been removed: You are now presented with a situation where somebody has made it clear that you are not "being nice" or "respecting" them.

Do you respect their ability to identify for themselves when they feel that way? Or will you only accept it if somebody can formulate an objective meaning for "be nice to me"?

Like...isn't it a pretty clearly understood concept in modern adult society that "Be nice to me" means "Don't do things you think will be mean, or things that, having done them once, you've been informed are not in fact nice"?