We can try to blame our faults on society, our parents, etc., but at the end of the day, we had the free will to make the decisions that we made. They were our choices; they were our faults, amirite?
They did the action, yes. But influences have a powerful hold on people, often times we don't even realize we're being influenced by something. Ex: a kid who grew up with out school because their parents didn't let them isn't going to see the value in going to school. It's their choice not to go later when they're an adult, yes. But when you analyze why they made their decision, hardly any of the fault can be laid to them. The actual action of not going is them, it is their entity that isn't going to school. But if you think "well, why would you do something you see as pointless and unnecessary and boring?" you can understand how their reasoning isn't their fault. It's built up influences from other things that are expressing themselves by their non-action, you can't really blame them for not wanting to take the action.
that's why I put in the comments that there are possible exceptions
it's just that people like to blame society or others for a lot of their faults
like one murder could say "my parents didn't love me enough so I murdered someone else to cause others pain"
of course this person's parent's negligence had an influence over them
but it was his/her decision to commit the murder
I was watching SVU and this man molested kids and it turns out he was molested as a child too
what this molester did influenced this man's actions as an adult but he still was in control of his actions
so I'm not saying that influence is not strong because it is
but we also have the free will to make our choices and take blame for our wrongdoings
instead of trying to play the blame game with others
not every neglected child becomes a murder
not every person who is molested becomes a molester
because we do have control over ourselves
Yes, but some people have more control than others AND not everyone is effected by the same thing in the same way. The child who got molested and repeats the circle was effected by it differently than the child who was molested and starts a charity for kids who went through the same thing, it all comes down to how their brain functions- and there's nothing you can do about it. If your brain told you there was a shadow man in the corner, despite evidence to the contrary you will just KNOW he is there, you can't overcome what your brain tells you. The guy who killed someone because he was mad and lost control, you can't expect him to use the control he doesn't have.
It's their fault in the sense that it's their neurotransmitters being being recepted in their brain, but you can't blame them that their brain works like that- it's not a crazy person's fault they're crazy.
I know, I'm comparing them. I'm saying it's not your fault electronic charges hit a synapses and trigger bursts of neurotransmitters the way they do in your brain. The brain has neuroplasticity and is capable of change, but it's just unfair to say that it's their fault they think a certain way because they didn't try hard enough to change it. Ex: a kid who grew up with racist parents is racist. They could change their thinking, it's technically possible, but why would they ever want to?
I would blame you if you randomly decided to hit someone, but I wouldn't blame you for punching them if they had said nasty things about you and your mother and got you angry to the point of tears. Anyone can decide to do something for no reason all by them self, I can chose to hold my breath for no reason but the post is about blaming the other person, I would blame the person who provoked you, same way I wouldn't judge a lion for tearing an idiot human up for jumping into the lion pit, I'd blame the human. Also I edited my comment with an example.
generally speaking, do you think many criminals need to face the consequences of their crimes? Did they share any fault in what they did? Did they have control over their actions?
I say they generally did share fault, have control, and should face consequences.
If they didn't own up to their faults, how would they even reform? They'd just say it's not their fault and blame it on external and some internal factors
and the post doesn't say the we're completely at fault
but that we are at fault
just because we're at fault, doesn't mean that others don't share the fault or that there aren't influential factors involved
If they robbed a bank because they wanted money, that's their fault.
If they killed someone because they were so overcome with rage, no, they were not in control of their actions. There's even something courts call a "crime of passion" and it gets the criminal off with a lesser sentence because they lost control of themselves and the court realizes this. Do I think they should face the consequences? Yes, it doesn't matter if they were in control or not, people deserve justice.
No, because justice isn't just about the person who committed the crime. Imagine a spectrum with the loved ones of the dead person on the right and the murderer on the rights. The family and friends of the dead person moves toward the middle of the spectrum of how the death should be handles, they grieve. You can't just have the killer get to chill on his end, you have to move him toward the middle, too.
if someone isn't able to control their actions (if an absence of control and mental instability are proven) , they are sent to a place where they can get help
not locked up in prison
if they lost all control, it's usually from mental instability and in those cases
doesn't the defense plead insanity?
I think that, for the most part, we are in control of our actions
we don't solely act on emotions all the time
we're able to make conscious efforts
also age plays a factor
toddler express their emotions as they are
but school aged children slowly learn to control these emotion and let them out when appropriate
No, there's a difference between what the courts call a crime of passion and plea of insanity, they're two separate things. Just because you're not tied up like a puppet doesn't mean you aren't in control.
I meant that just because you don't have someone holding a gun to you or something forcing you to do something doesn't mean you have control.
Main reason I disagree with this post is because while I agree in general people are responsible for their actions, at the end of the day we're all a slave to our social conditioning and neurotransmitters and all that jazz.
This is generally speaking
I'm not talking about situations where people are forced/coerced
and other possible exceptions
They did the action, yes. But influences have a powerful hold on people, often times we don't even realize we're being influenced by something. Ex: a kid who grew up with out school because their parents didn't let them isn't going to see the value in going to school. It's their choice not to go later when they're an adult, yes. But when you analyze why they made their decision, hardly any of the fault can be laid to them. The actual action of not going is them, it is their entity that isn't going to school. But if you think "well, why would you do something you see as pointless and unnecessary and boring?" you can understand how their reasoning isn't their fault. It's built up influences from other things that are expressing themselves by their non-action, you can't really blame them for not wanting to take the action.
that's why I put in the comments that there are possible exceptions
it's just that people like to blame society or others for a lot of their faults
like one murder could say "my parents didn't love me enough so I murdered someone else to cause others pain"
of course this person's parent's negligence had an influence over them
but it was his/her decision to commit the murder
I was watching SVU and this man molested kids and it turns out he was molested as a child too
what this molester did influenced this man's actions as an adult but he still was in control of his actions
so I'm not saying that influence is not strong because it is
but we also have the free will to make our choices and take blame for our wrongdoings
instead of trying to play the blame game with others
not every neglected child becomes a murder
not every person who is molested becomes a molester
because we do have control over ourselves
Yes, but some people have more control than others AND not everyone is effected by the same thing in the same way. The child who got molested and repeats the circle was effected by it differently than the child who was molested and starts a charity for kids who went through the same thing, it all comes down to how their brain functions- and there's nothing you can do about it. If your brain told you there was a shadow man in the corner, despite evidence to the contrary you will just KNOW he is there, you can't overcome what your brain tells you. The guy who killed someone because he was mad and lost control, you can't expect him to use the control he doesn't have.
yes but I didn't say that's it completely their fault
but it is still their fault
they still have to own up to their actions because they did have control in most cases (excluding the mentally ill)
Like I said
there are exceptions and the post is generally speaking
many people have control though
many are not mentally unstable/ill
I could punch someone in the face and say I was mad because of something that happened in the morning
still my fault even though something else influenced me and/or some else shares the fault
and we do have the power to silence voices inside our heads through therapy/medicine/meditation
It's their fault in the sense that it's their neurotransmitters being being recepted in their brain, but you can't blame them that their brain works like that- it's not a crazy person's fault they're crazy.
this post isn't about mentally ill people though
it's about the general population that has the ability to control and make their own decisions
that's why I stated before you commented that there are possible exceptions
I know, I'm comparing them. I'm saying it's not your fault electronic charges hit a synapses and trigger bursts of neurotransmitters the way they do in your brain. The brain has neuroplasticity and is capable of change, but it's just unfair to say that it's their fault they think a certain way because they didn't try hard enough to change it. Ex: a kid who grew up with racist parents is racist. They could change their thinking, it's technically possible, but why would they ever want to?
but if I punched someone
It would be my fault
I could've not hit the person
but I chose too
if people didn't believe this was my fault, they would say that I don't deserve suspension because they don't find me at fault
but since I am at fault, I have to face the consequences
if people didn't own up and say it's their fault
they'd probably walk around and do terrible things
I would blame you if you randomly decided to hit someone, but I wouldn't blame you for punching them if they had said nasty things about you and your mother and got you angry to the point of tears. Anyone can decide to do something for no reason all by them self, I can chose to hold my breath for no reason but the post is about blaming the other person, I would blame the person who provoked you, same way I wouldn't judge a lion for tearing an idiot human up for jumping into the lion pit, I'd blame the human. Also I edited my comment with an example.
the example you gave is very specific
let me ask you some questions
generally speaking, do you think many criminals need to face the consequences of their crimes? Did they share any fault in what they did? Did they have control over their actions?
I say they generally did share fault, have control, and should face consequences.
If they didn't own up to their faults, how would they even reform? They'd just say it's not their fault and blame it on external and some internal factors
and the post doesn't say the we're completely at fault
but that we are at fault
just because we're at fault, doesn't mean that others don't share the fault or that there aren't influential factors involved
If they robbed a bank because they wanted money, that's their fault.
If they killed someone because they were so overcome with rage, no, they were not in control of their actions. There's even something courts call a "crime of passion" and it gets the criminal off with a lesser sentence because they lost control of themselves and the court realizes this. Do I think they should face the consequences? Yes, it doesn't matter if they were in control or not, people deserve justice.
if the one who was overcome with rage got charged, wouldn't it be unjust to have this person face consequences for actions they weren't in control of?
unless, they were mentally ill or the like
they had some control
they could've used that rage in another way
obviously this person didn't have as much control as someone who premeditated on the murder
but this person had some sort of control nonetheless
No, because justice isn't just about the person who committed the crime. Imagine a spectrum with the loved ones of the dead person on the right and the murderer on the rights. The family and friends of the dead person moves toward the middle of the spectrum of how the death should be handles, they grieve. You can't just have the killer get to chill on his end, you have to move him toward the middle, too.
people do lose control and murder
but they don't lose all control for the most part
if someone isn't able to control their actions (if an absence of control and mental instability are proven) , they are sent to a place where they can get help
not locked up in prison
if they lost all control, it's usually from mental instability and in those cases
doesn't the defense plead insanity?
I think that, for the most part, we are in control of our actions
we don't solely act on emotions all the time
we're able to make conscious efforts
also age plays a factor
toddler express their emotions as they are
but school aged children slowly learn to control these emotion and let them out when appropriate
No, there's a difference between what the courts call a crime of passion and plea of insanity, they're two separate things. Just because you're not tied up like a puppet doesn't mean you aren't in control.
oh okay
I don't know much about crime of passion
I can see where you're coming from on some points
but for the most part, I think we have control over our choices/faults
if we didn't have this control, we probably wouldn't be able to make significant changes
our day to day actions are mostly of sound mind, thought, and with control
I don't follow what you mean by the last sentence
I meant that just because you don't have someone holding a gun to you or something forcing you to do something doesn't mean you have control.
Main reason I disagree with this post is because while I agree in general people are responsible for their actions, at the end of the day we're all a slave to our social conditioning and neurotransmitters and all that jazz.