Again, I can't recall a time in the last 500 years where "The wealthier person being right" wasn't as close or closer to the default assumption than societies of today.
If anything, there are probably more exceptions to that assumption nowadays than there were in the age where dueling was acceptable.
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!People do not snap so easily. Especially if they are not accustomed to killing, the people that would be willing to do so would do it regardless of laws.
Read my stories!It's worth noting that duelling in a fashion is legal. It just takes the preparation of finding a boxing ring or MMA arena whose owners are willing to let a couple of people go at it, and of course you don't fight to the death. Here's a pub that used to be up for that sort of thing: [1]
.
Also, duelling would work In a World… where Right Makes Might but that world isn't ours. And how would this pan out anyway? A couple of guys duel over girlfriend issues, it means the girl doesn't get a say in this, and will probably end up with the most violent man of the two. Get politicians duelling over policy and again the best guy at fighting wins, not the best leader or the one with the most sensible views.
Unless I misunderstand something, the supposed woman has a say by not dating whoever wins. If a politician loses a duel, I'm almost positive they'd just elect somebody new.
Fight smart, not fair.Well, it's not like other people are bound to uphold a contract between two people.
Fight smart, not fair.I contend that most duels were effectively pointless, making the fact that people died over them even more tragic.
I suppose that today you could legally duel to resolve some disbutes, if both parties agreed in an arbitration court to settle it in a boxing or MMA ring as mentioned above. In those cases I have no issues with it.
edited 1st Feb '11 5:09:59 AM by Meeble
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!Meeble:
I agree. IMO... Arguments that duels are good at resolving: who is better in a fair swordfight, gunfight or what have you. Arguments that duels are not good at resolving: who should have the girl, the economic policy, whether he should pay for spilling your pint, pretty much everything else. What duels would seem to be best at resolving but actually aren't: satisfying your family's offended honour. The underlying cause of that loss of face is still there and will come up again, but now someone's dead over it.
@betaalpha: I don't think Might Makes Right doesn't aply to the real world. Maybe not always but at least in certain degress.
myrdschaem: understandable error to make but I was referring to Right Makes Might, or the idea that righteous people are simply more powerful than the baddies and would therefore win in duels.
Certainly in the real world some people think both Right Is Might and Might Is Right - God gave them this power or they worked hard for it and they deserve to crush theor opponents. Maybe in a duel :)

Glad someone finally said it.
If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~