The collective over the individual, where does responsibility belong?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

And how many of him are there in the world?

This is like excusing all gender dysphoric people because a fraction of a few have chromosomal abnormalities that most do not and never will have or excusing all abortions by hand waving at the fraction of the few who were raped or had ectopic pregnancy or similar circumstances.

Again this is trying to collective a bunch of people under the umbrella of a very few individuals and their specific circumstances, and it is not appropriate, but you excuse them just the same.

Collectivizing the problem allows the young woman on her career track to justify an abortion carried out strictly for her own convenience and NOT because she was raped or because her circumstances put her in medical difficulty or risk, but solely because she didn't want to give up her shot at promotion and got in trouble because she couldn't be bothered to take full responsibility for her own personal sexual actions.

Do you see personal v collective here?

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

This collective responsibility is one dangerous road (or slippery road) to the notion that nothing is evil. I have to agree with you and argue against this viewpoint.

I remember watching a documentary where excuses and justification were found for all sorts of atrocities , murders and serial killings. It was bordering on the ridiculous. One guy's murderous activities was being blamed on his living too near to high power electricity cables. Basically we are being asked to share the responsibility for gruesome acts.

I do not subscribe to this nonsense. In my view the guy with the pink hair in the video has no conscience and does not know himself what is right or wrong. Surely , it cannot be hard to ascertain what is right and what is wrong; all it requires is to put yourself in the shoes of the victim.

The notion that somebody is pushed by society to commit an astrocity (and we are supposed to look upon that person with kindness and consider ourselves responsible ) is the notion of a very sick person.

In my way of thinking, the person committing the crime takes full responsibility full stop.

I suppose this is not new. Before we had :" It was not me.. I was tempted by the devil". Now that so few go to church or practice any religion , it has become :"it was not me ....it was society"

blah yadda blah yaddah blah.....

Aren't you so special, OP?
Wow.

You get to decide who is worthy of life or a slow starvation or assistance with food!!!.....you get to decide who gets to live in a reasonably inhabitable dwelling!! YOU! You, man! You get to say "no - those kids do not get to have a roof." You can say "I am totally against abortion!" but then turn around and declare that those babies don't deserve enough food or any clothing.....you want to let them all be born, and then to IGNORE THEM and shame their mothers (and fathers, when available).....

You need to figure out where you draw the line.
EIther you want all babies to be born and are willing to see to their well-being, OR YOU DON'T want those babies to be born.

make up your mind

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

blah yadda blah yaddah blah..... Aren't you so special, OP? Wow. You get to decide who is worthy of life or a slow starvation or assistance with food!!!.....you get to decide who gets to live in a reasonably inhabitable dwelling!! YOU! You, man! You get to say "no - those kids do not get to have a roof." You can say "I am totally against abortion!" but then turn around and declare that those babies don't deserve enough food or any clothing.....you want to let them all be born, and then to IGNORE THEM and shame their mothers (and fathers, when available)..... You need to figure out where you draw the line. EIther you want all babies to be born and are willing to see to their well-being, OR YOU DON'T want those babies to be born. make up your mind

Hmmmmm...as an agnostic who has no desire to put God/dess in a box (any labels) or argue that no such thing exits, not my bag, dear.

I'm surprise that you think (I think) in such terms.

However you the blessed BuzzyWigs have revealed to the world, that I am why its 42, and you are no doubt correct that all sex happens through me and I'm responsible for all the unrealized life and all abortions are because of me and not any individual choice.

Are you perhaps a tad under the influence of certain chemical reactions with the human biology, just a friendly cat asking, no judgment

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

Thanks for the link, I remember reading that somewhere. Read a lot of old sic fi when I was a kid, they used to explore the Universe, now its been done to death and made boring, almost robotic.

Edit: Real life is become what they wrote about back when, that is much more scary.

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet


On a less catty note, when I started this thread, I did not consider abortion and how me stressing responsibility of choice on the individual might hurt other individuals.

I will own that, but I will say that choice is choice, but context is queen, we make choices, I am not making judgments (remember context is golden), we who make the choices live with it, and accept it, because that is the price of free will.

a reply to: intrptr


It is not really surprising there are a lot of writers who wanted to explore ideas with out upsetting political ideologues, fantasy, sci-fi and fairy tale were protection, and entertainment too.

Read some Iain M Banks, now that is a culture I would like to be a part of

a reply to: crowdedskies

This collective responsibility is one dangerous road (or slippery road) to the notion that nothing is evil. I have to agree with you and argue against this viewpoint.

Okay, you do not have to agree, but I appreciate your acknowledgement of my viewpoint.

I remember watching a documentary where excuses and justification were found for all sorts of atrocities , murders and serial killings. It was bordering on the ridiculous. One guy's murderous activities was being blamed on his living too near to high power electricity cables. Basically we are being asked to share the responsibility for gruesome acts.

Yes society can make many excuses for its perceived failings, it has the power

I do not subscribe to this nonsense. In my view the guy with the pink hair in the video has no conscience and does not know himself what is right or wrong. Surely , it cannot be hard to ascertain what is right and what is wrong; all it requires is to put yourself in the shoes of the victim.

Yes putting ourselves in the shoes of the victims gives up a viewpoint that will support and free them, however first of all we need to verify and allow a process to judge their claims, or we run the risk of being deceived and persecuting the innocent, it's hard work but we have to take the time to consider it all.

The notion that somebody is pushed by society to commit an atrocity (and we are supposed to look upon that person with kindness and consider ourselves responsible ) is the notion of a very sick person.

You are correct, however context and circumstance have to be considered, we can only view the world through our subjective bubbles and that means we have to consider our confirmation bias in all things.

It is one of those contradictions we exist in where as we are the individual and to balance our individual view with the collective, without necessarily surrendering our view to the majority, we have to do some hard work, reality is a bitch, and it is neither me or you.

In my way of thinking, the person committing the crime takes full responsibility full stop.

I suppose this is not new. Before we had :" It was not me.. I was tempted by the devil". Now that so few go to church or practice any religion , it has become :"it was not me ....it was society"

Yes responsibility rests with the individual, but if society is going to do the judging it needs to be considered and without politics, right-left or gendered.

If you are unwilling to support the offspring produced by conception at an unfortunate time, then you have no place to talk about women being 'forced' to carry an accidental pregnancy to term. If you do not want to help support that child, then shut the hell up about what she decides to do.

god you people make me sick

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

If you are unwilling to support the offspring produced by conception at an unfortunate time, then you have no place to talk about women being 'forced' to carry an accidental pregnancy to term. If you do not want to help support that child, then shut the hell up about what she decides to do.

Are you confused? I would support any child within society! and I will not judge anyone who doesn't bring to term (with context).

What in this thread are you so upset about?

God you people make me sick

What people? You seem to be living in your imagination, I will ask you kindly to stop projecting

I find it interesting that the question of responsability here is continually associated almost automatically, with negative outcomes or actions. As if the word is synonymous with "blame" or "guilt" !

A collective can also be responsible for positive or beneficial actions. In fact, people seem to have no problem admitting to their adherence to a group think which took actions resulting in positive or beneficial outcomes.

I find it fascinating, also, to see the contrast between our american assumption that to join a collective power means "violence" - the herd mentality is evil, destructive...
Whereas in the country I live in presently, it is the opposite - a common saying is, "I mustn't listen to myself". The belief is that people left to their own devices and will do bad things. Thats when they make mistakes. It is with the added perception and judgement of their peers that they make more ethical and beneficial choices. (for example, peer pressure is what keeps a person from drinking too much at a party...).

We seem to think evil is a group of mindless animals,
The french tend to think evil is a psychopathic lone shooter.

a reply to: Bluesma

That actually is very interesting. Peer pressure seems to encourage people to drink more excessively here. How is peer pressure effected by age groups there? Do you count parents into peer pressure? Maybe the difference is partly from the notion that kids just need to make their own mistakes and learn things for themselves over here?

originally posted by: VP740
a reply to: Bluesma

That actually is very interesting. Peer pressure seems to encourage people to drink more excessively here. How is peer pressure effected by age groups there? Do you count parents into peer pressure? Maybe the difference is partly from the notion that kids just need to make their own mistakes and learn things for themselves over here?

It is really the opposite. It is not acceptable to be drunk in public, so kids go out in groups -( that is why they don't "date" as well.) The idea is "we are each others keepers." Friends don't let friends drive drunk, or go to bed with nasty characters, or make other types of bad choices.

I must admit, I had a very hard time grasping this concept. But now, I see a certain rationality and logic to it.
I had a hard time because I am normally a very self disciplined person, to an extreme, so I wished to find friends that would encourage me to "let go" ... but these french women don't do that kind of friendship. They judge, they tell you what you should do, they expect you to keep them inline also...I just can't seem to do this.

Whatever, it's a different culture. But it made me realize that our beliefs determine our reality - if being socially connected with others, and letting them influence your choices is seen as a bad thing, it will be. -And vice versa.

What is the base of morality though? Is it not empathy? Empathy is the dreaded trap of the individual will.

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

Honestly, I think I was in a pissy mood, and I jumped from what you said to the ongoing debate regarding women's right to choose whether to bear children or not.

I am not sure why you brought up being 'agnostic' or '42' (I know perfectly well what they both represent --- maybe I wasn't aware there was any talk of "God/s" in the mix??

Bottom line (I am an agnostic, btw, and pro-choice) is that the society/collective has to make hard decisions when it comes to who shall suffer and who should not.

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

As it is only at the individual level that we have any personal control (over our emotion, over our thoughts and over our individual actions) and can affect meaningful change.

This is only partially true. Are you familiar with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy?

Our actions: yes we control those.

Our thoughts - no. We can only ignore them, or deliberately change them. Deciding to ignore or change them is an action.

Our emotions - definitely not. We can not control our emotions. They exist whether acknowledged or not. We can learn to manage their expression --- but we can not remove them, lest we become inhuman.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Honestly, I think I was in a pissy mood, and I jumped from what you said to the ongoing debate regarding women's right to choose whether to bear children or not.

No worries, I've been there.

I am not sure why you brought up being 'agnostic' or '42' (I know perfectly well what they both represent --- maybe I wasn't aware there was any talk of "God/s" in the mix??

Going back and reading my response I have little idea (nothing much in the memory bank or buffer) I would blame liquid sustenance but this is a thread about responsibility, and intoxication, is no excuse for me. The 42 thing was about hitch hikers guide.

Bottom line (I am an agnostic, btw, and pro-choice) is that the society/collective has to make hard decisions when it comes to who shall suffer and who should not.

The society/collective establishes the environment, but you and me can choose if we will co-operate, there is a choice and we do not have to participate (the consequences of saying no can be horrible, but it is still a choice)

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

This is only partially true. Are you familiar with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy?

Yes

Our actions: yes we control those.

Yes (excepting extreme coercion)

Our thoughts - no. We can only ignore them, or deliberately change them. Deciding to ignore or change them is an action.

I kind of agree, but anecdotally I know (and have read) you can train your mind to limit and/or promote certain thoughts (NLP etc)

Our emotions - definitely not. We can not control our emotions. They exist whether acknowledged or not. We can learn to manage their expression --- but we can not remove them, lest we become inhuman.

Yes, but again when we become conscious of our emotions we can take control of them to a degree dismiss/subvert/dampen/question/enhance/magnify our emotions deliberately.

So responsibility still in the majority of instances, ultimately rests with the individual, I think

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

Wouldn't that depend on each individual's impairment?
I have a brain...thing ,that is abnormal but I don't exactly salivate about harming others so much as ideas to paint and create.
I became a soldier to see if I could fight.
Now solitude is preferable.
I have always detested rude people ...sometimes right into the hospital.
It was RUDE and dangerous,now I have had my fill and realize my wit is a better tool and reserve the OUTCH stuff for dire circumstances.


I also used SSRIs and lived through that avalanche of emotions I was unprepared for.
I live in Colorado ,there is a better solution,for PTSD than rolling the dice on murdering those around you.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Wouldn't that depend on each individual's impairment? I have a brain...thing ,that is abnormal but I don't exactly salivate about harming others so much as ideas to paint and create.

Yes, I was speaking from the average impairment (idoit me), any individual's impairment can be transformative, changes all of it.

I became a soldier to see if I could fight.
Now solitude is preferable.
I have always detested rude people ...sometimes right into the hospital.
It was RUDE and dangerous,now I have had my fill and realize my wit is a better tool and reserve the OUTCH stuff for dire circumstances.

You are still here, you can fight,
I am in solitude, not 100% sure if its preferable, but it's in the high numbers
I hate hospital
Wit saves you and them, funny too
Yes, if your going to break them, best there is little option, for me

I also used SSRIs and lived through that avalanche of emotions I was unprepared for.
I live in Colorado ,thee is a better solution,for PTSD than rolling the dice on murdering those around you.

The avalanche for me was coming off, don't regret that, was a zombie on them, regret some of that, UGLY snip

If you understand and have any control then responsibility is with you (when its u) and me (when its me)
:devil

a reply to: CatandtheHatchet

You and I made it THROUGH without ACTING on it.
Dylan didn't I believe ,HE was lost in it,because he had NO context and at HIS age it was taken as normal.


DANG memory.... I put a 1911 to my head from loneliness and anger at the world,but a voice like a DRILL SGT ordered me to stop it and quit being a puss.
So I DID act ....and QUIT.

It sounded Ermey to me or it was an AUDITORY hallucination but IT happened.