Raven's Reflections: An It Harm None

An it Harm None: An Analysis of the Rede

In the Correllian tradition, it is said that the Rede should be taken litterally and that is not open to interpretation. It then procedes to interpret it (there really is no way around this) by defining the word harm along such lines that the Rede allows for things such as self-defense. Looking up the dictionary definition, however, we see that harm means physical or psychological injury or damage (I won't discuss the second definition, since evil and wrong are too unspecific). Obviously, there is a need to state more precisely what we mean when we say An it harm none.

Harm is derived from the Anglo-Saxon word hearm, which when we examine Beowulf for context it seems to have meant something to the effect of injury or insult. Old Anglo-Saxon sources would imply some form of deliberate damage. Obviously the Rede is in need of further interpretation, since this would seem to include surgery, abortion, and self defense if were to go by the simplistic interpretation that the Rede bans all harm.

A more formal logical analysis of the Rede is a little more forthcoming, and fits better with the way that Wicca is structured: A religion that does not tell you what to think or how to think, but just that provides guidelines and lets you deal with the consequences. So, using the properly formatted english version of the Rede (substituting if for an, etc) let's examine the Rede with this in mind.

Let's say that we can rephrase the Rede to say If the action harms no one then the action is allowed. Everyone should agree that I have not distorted the meaning of the Rede at all by doing this. Let's then say that I have an action which harms someone. Looking at the above statement the Rede does not automatically disallow it regardless of whether the action itself is appropriate. To believe otherwise is a logical fallacy called Denying the Antecedent.

Denying the Antecedent is where we say if p then q means that if not p then not q. For example, if we say that If New Orleans is in Louisiana then it is in the United States and then say this means that if New Orleans is not in Louisiana then it is not in the United States then we have committed the logical fallacy of Denying the Antecedent. Looking at the Wiccan Rede, we see that it follows the same form of if p then q, where p is the action harms no one and q is the action is allowed.

What good is the Rede, then? It tells us not to put arbitrary restrictions on other's (or our own) actions! If an action does not hurt anyone then we should allow it and allow for it and not try to arbitrarily throw up barriers. Thus, the Rede is not a statement of what we should not be doing but is rather an allowance that leaves everything that might cause harm for us to decide for ourselves in our day-to-day lives.

When we look at the Law of Return the elegant simplicity of the Rede comes out: The Rede tells us that there is no action which does not harm another person that is inappropriate; the Law of Return tells us that we must face the consequences of our own actions. Thus, to summarize the entirety of the Wiccan belief, it says that so long as you harm no one you cannot be impunged, but in harming another you are on your own and risk backlash, so make sure you're doing it for the right reasons! We can do things that harm others, are going to do things that harm others, but when we act--positively or negatively--the repercussions of those actions and thoughts are going to visit us again.

Thus, the next time you are tempted harm someone through thoughts, words, spells, fists--or however else you might choose to do it--think carefully: Is harming this individual, in this way, consistent with who I want to become? Is it necessary? Are my intentions and the energy I am putting into this positive? Will the backlash be worth it? If the answer to these questions is no, then you need to consider very carefully why you wanted to harm them in the first place.

On the other hand, if the answer to those questions is yes, then in consideration for why you want to cause harm it might (by no means guaranteed! that is for you to decide) be completely appropriate to do so. Surgery is a kind of harm, yet it can save lives. Antibiotics certainly are not very pleasant from a bacterium's point of view, but for us are a good--and sometimes life saving--thing to have. Wormwood can be used to expunge tapeworms from your body, it is also a poison that kills the tapeworm and can damage you. Each of these has a time and a place when they are appropriate and we should not hestiate to use them in that time and in that place--the Rede does not keep us from doing anything, but only advises us where we need to consider our actions more closely.