The guilty would probably never tell the truth?

A fight broke out among the two siblings, their loud voices and outburst of anger reaching the mother’s ears. The anxious mother rushed to investigate the matter to find both her children grappling with each other, their faces contorted in fierce anger. She shouted to them to stop the fight and after a few minutes succeeded in getting both to stop. With chest heaving, breathing heavily and arms hanging at their sides, they continued to glare at each other as the mother told them to tell her what had happened.

“He spat at me and called me ‘stupid’,’ one of them accused.
“Hmm! He slapped me first. So, what do you expect me to do?” the other demanded.
“Bluffing! You started it first,” was the respond.
Now who did the mother believe? How would the mother ever know the truth? I can tell you this: she would never know the truth. And a clever mother would not try to as it would be a futile effort. Which person is guilty? How would she know who was guilty when both claim to be the innocent party? The guilty would claim his story to be the truth and the other’s story to be a bluff. Of course, the innocent party would rightly insist his story to be the truth. There is no third party to tell the truth.

In the above true story, both of the people involved in the fight were children who just wanted to escape possible punishment from the mother. However, even when adults are the ones who are involved in a dispute, a quarrel or a fight, the same denial of wrongful acts or refusal to accept blame is evident. The guilty seldom admits his/her fault. It is always the other party who ought to be admonished. Many people just have the attitude that they cannot admit to any wrong.

And there are even those who are weaker who hide behind their weakness using it as a license to and even as a proof that it must be the other party who is wrong. “How could I have started it when he is the stronger one?” appears to be good logic but it may not be the truth. I have personally seen small guys disturb bigger guys and then shout for help when the bigger guys decided that enough was enough and give those little fellows a beating to teach them a lesson. Unfortunately, should the little fellows cry out for help claiming that those bigger guy are bullying them, such little fellows are usually believed.

Therefore, parents ought to be impartial, not always thinking that the little brother is always the one who is bullied. After all, there are younger brothers who know that they could get away with bullying their bigger brother. Parents ought to remember that even their little angels can be rascally and that the guilty party will most probably not tell the truth.

So, if there is a talk to be given, give both parties their lessons. Do not accuse anyone unless we see with our own eyes what did happen. In this way, a parent will not find himself or herself in the uncomfortable position of having wronged the party in the right. Respect for the parents would not be jeopardised.

A fight broke out among the two siblings, their loud voices and outburst of anger reaching the mother’s ears. The anxious mother rushed to investigate the matter to find both her children grappling with each other, their faces contorted in fierce anger. She shouted to them to stop the fight and after a few minutes succeeded in getting both to stop. With chest heaving, breathing heavily and arms hanging at their sides, they continued to glare at each other as the mother told them to tell her what had happened.
“He spat at me and called me ‘stupid’,’ one of them accused.
“Hmm! He slapped me first. So, what do you expect me to do?” the other demanded.
“Bluffing! You started it first,” was the respond.
Now who did the mother believe? How would the mother ever know the truth? I can tell you this: she would never know the truth. And a clever mother would not try to as it would be a futile effort. Which person is guilty? How would she know who was guilty when both claim to be the innocent party? The guilty would claim his story to be the truth and the other’s story to be a bluff. Of course, the innocent party would rightly insist his story to be the truth. There is no third party to tell the truth.

In the above true story, both of the people involved in the fight were children who just wanted to escape possible punishment from the mother. However, even when adults are the ones who are involved in a dispute, a quarrel or a fight, the same denial of wrongful acts or refusal to accept blame is evident. The guilty seldom admits his/her fault. It is always the other party who ought to be admonished. Many people just have the attitude that they cannot admit to any wrong.

And there are even those who are weaker who hide behind their weakness using it as a license to and even as a proof that it must be the other party who is wrong. “How could I have started it when he is the stronger one?” appears to be good logic but it may not be the truth. I have personally seen small guys disturb bigger guys and then shout for help when the bigger guys decided that enough was enough and give those little fellows a beating to teach them a lesson. Unfortunately, should the little fellows cry out for help claiming that those bigger guy are bullying them, such little fellows are usually believed.

Therefore, parents ought to be impartial, not always thinking that the little brother is always the one who is bullied. After all, there are younger brothers who know that they could get away with bullying their bigger brother. Parents ought to remember that even their little angels can be rascally and that the guilty party will most probably not tell the truth.

So, if there is a talk to be given, give both parties their lessons. Do not accuse anyone unless we see with our own eyes what did happen. In this way, a parent will not find himself or herself in the uncomfortable position of having wronged the party in the right. Respect for the parents would not be jeopardised.