Quick (and easy) Poll

[papasmerf]

Of course your life is more valueable to you than that of an other. If you have a problem with that base survival programming, you have a problem with being human.

Then your life has no value to others.......Where you ever in a crash and your car was burning you can die with the knowledge that no cop or fireman would risk his or her life for yours.

Don't give that crap about that being their job...You know too well how much other lives are more valuable to them than yours.


Oh and were it your child about to be murdered you can sleep well knowing you are more important than your child.



May you never need help and may help never think as you do.

 

[train]

So you are saying you would neither care or get involved because the odd are she will be ok?

You have a real comprehension problem on this thread don't you

That's not what I said at all. I'd like to think I would intervene.

If after all this time you don't understand and accept to answer the original question you probably shouldn't be posting in this thread.

In the original question IT WAS A GIVEN that you didn't intervene. Geez

 

[Chimpanzeethat]

dumb thread

 

[reboot]

Then your life has no value to others... You know too well how much other lives are more valuable to them than yours.

While I'm sure the keyboard hero in you actually believes something like the position being taken here in approaching a response to me and the thread's postulate, I'm also certain you wouldn't have quite so definite beliefs in life. Nothing is ever so nice and simple. I hoped the few examples I gave made clear the complexities that the trivial question posed does not take into account.

Anyway, to say your life is more valuable to you than the value of an other's life is not quite the same as saying an other's life has "no value." I would think that is obvious, but obviously not.

 

[papasmerf]

While I'm sure the keyboard hero in you actually believes something like the position being taken here in approaching a response to me and the thread's postulate, I'm also certain you wouldn't have quite so definite beliefs in life. Nothing is ever so nice and simple. I hoped the few examples I gave made clear the complexities that the trivial question posed does not take into account.

Anyway, to say your life is more valuable to you than the value of an other's life is not quite the same as saying an other's life has "no value." I would think that is obvious, but obviously not.

It is nice and simple............

You act because you would hope someone would were it your child.
BTW I speak not from a keyboard but from practice and reality.

 

[Herodotus]

dumb thread

Indeed. Why do you guys let yourself be sucked in by this colossal shit-disturber?

I think the original poster should perhaps state what he feels is his personal responsibility level and then let others discuss. I'm not up for someone's games or "test", let alone some anonymous asshole's judgment, which is why I immediately deleted my post (which happened to be the first reply to this thread.)

To the OP: show some of the testicular fortitude you claim others on TERB lack and let us know what you think your level of responsibility would be.

 

[TQM]

Herodotus

The point - and my position - should be obvious. It's sometimes better to have you think about something without it being coloured by someone's opinion. This idea isn't new or particularly controversial.

Responsibility isn't always a 100%/0% game. Responsibilty might be there even if you've done nothing.

Sitting back watching a toddler drown in the pool isn't acceptable because you'd bear the brunt of the responsibility for the death even if you had absolutely nothing to do with that toddler getting into the pool in the first place.

Responsibility comes in degrees. Determining responsibility can be complicated.

But generally, when something is wrong somewhere, even if you weren't the one who made it wrong, you can have a degree of responsibility to fix it and you can bear the burden if you don't.

And then if you think long and hard about it, you'll be able to generalize and apply what you've figured out through analogy to other, perhaps political, situations.

Responsibility is a complex beast.

 

[papasmerf]

Indeed. Why do you guys let yourself be sucked in by this colossal shit-disturber?

I think the original poster should perhaps state what he feels is his personal responsibility level and then let others discuss. I'm not up for someone's games or "test", let alone some anonymous asshole's judgment, which is why I immediately deleted my post (which happened to be the first reply to this thread.)

To the OP: show some of the testicular fortitude you claim others on TERB lack and let us know what you think your level of responsibility would be.

In my opinon TQM believes that if he did not pull the trigger he has no quilt.

His not wanting to get involved shows how he feels about others.

 

[TQM]

papa,

Really what you've just said is nothing more than cyber-slander. You should be ashamed.

 

[papasmerf]

Really what you've just said is nothing more than cyber-slander. You should be ashamed.

One should never be ashamed of speaking the truth..But we can be ashamed of the man we speak of

 

[Herodotus]

TQM: If this thread had been started by any one of many other posters, I would have answered the question honestly and thoughtfully. The problem is that your board persona is that of a smarmy, arrogant and judgmental individual who attempts to belittle others and self-aggrandize on an escort review board. Think about that for a second...

With you, it appears there is rarely a right or correct answer. I think that you really do believe that you are some sort of superior being in an intelligence and moralistic sense. While you appear to be an intelligent guy, your hubris and you sanctimonious attitude just makes it impossible to carry on any sort of real discourse. Sorry, I know that you think you're stimulating a vibrant discussion, but what you're actually doing is just talking down to people and judging them - and no one likes that.

Your response to my post is a perfect example. I don't need a lecture on responsibility. And I didn't need you to explain what your question meant.
I just don't want to be used as a guinea pig by some anonymous smarty-pants. Seriously TQM, I hope you don't live in a glass house.

Edit/addendum: That being said, I'd like to engage in some serious discussions with you, so long as I was not told that I was giving you the wrong answer. As stated, I think you are a smart person who has a lot of insight and a strong moral compass. But from where I sit, your problem is you just don't like to accept other points of view, which makes it impossible to carry on any sort of friendly and fun banter.

 

[papasmerf]

TQM: If this thread had been started by any one of many other posters, I would have answered the question honestly and thoughtfully. The problem is that your board persona is that of a smarmy, arrogant and judgmental individual who attempts to belittle others and self-aggrandize on an escort review board.

With you, it appears there is rarely a right or correct answer. I think that you really do believe that you are some sort of superior being. You appear to be an intelligent guy, but your hubris and you sanctimonious attitude just makes it impossible to carry on any sort of real discourse. Sorry, I know that you think you're stimulating a vibrant discussion, but what you're actually doing is just talking down to people and judging them - and no one likes that.

He has the same affect as mini-me

an over the top person with delusions of grander

 

[fuji]

That's a strange answer. On the one hand you say you are 0% responsible for her murder, on the other hand you say you are 100% responsible for not intervening (in what was her murder).

Can't have it both ways.

Yes I can. That's how I see it. Also happens to be how the law sees it.

If it went before a judge the killer would be assigned 100% culpability for the murder, while someone who walked away without rendering reasonable assistance might be found liable of criminal negligence. I assign 100% of the responsibility for the murder to the killer, and 100% of the culpability for doing nothing to intervene to this hypothetical me that negligently walked away.

Here is how you can see that negligence is a separate issue: If instead of being murdered she had passed out on the street stricken with a heart attack and I walked on by then I am EQUALLY as culpable of negligence as in the situation where she is being attacked. The culpability is for not rendering reasonable assistance to a person in distress. The source of their distress (murder, sickness) has NOTHING to do with this particular culpability other than setting the scene.

You do not become culpable of murder (or of inflicting heart attacks) merely for being negligent. You become culpable of negligence for being negligent.

Two separate moral issues. Two separate crimes. Two separate responsibilities.

Your original question was flawed in that you left the object of the verb "responsible" unstated: Responsible for WHAT?

To put an even finer point on it if you say "culpable for her death"(*) then sure I would share in some culpability for her death, but not for her murder. Two separate crimes contributed to her death: murder, and negligence. I am culpable of one of the two factors which jointly caused her death, but not of the other.

(*) In my original post I wrote not culpable for her death, and on further reflection that should really read not culpable for her murder. The additional analysis I posted above makes it clear that they are different, and thus my original statement was inaccurate. Above is what I meant.

 

[assoholic]

call 911 ... it's their job. I saw this happen from my home and while I could have gone out and involved myself it was better that I called 911 and reported the incident ... the police arrived very quick as they do for women being beaten up and arrested the dude in mid punch.

Turns out the gal refused to show up to court and the guy got off the charges relating to her.


bbk

..I called the cops, and when it came up for court found
out she was being charged!

 

[Insidious Von]

In my opinon TQM believes that if he did not pull the trigger he has no quilt.

Papasmerf, I had no idea you were into knitting.

Since TQM views me as something of a knuckle dragger already, I would act.

Although I've never dealt with a homicidal situation, dealing with strike breakers can at times be similar. As men it's incumbent upon us to protect those more vulnerable than ourselves. Sure I would call 911, but by the time the police arrived I'd probably be the one getting arrested. It's difficult being homicidal when one of your eyes is being pulled out.

Besides, I bought an expensive bed and I enjoy sleeping in it with a clear conscience.

 

[fuji]

I have intervened in public fights a few times. Other times I have judged I'd likely get killed and called the police.

Generally if there are other people around the best way to intervene is first get the attention of some of the other people around, say "Hey, look at that, we ought to do something about it", try and gather as many as you can. One guy approaching a fight is likely to become a part of it, 3-4 guys approaching the fight are likely to scare off the attacker. In any case it's best to intervene from a distance--yell at them to stop, that you're calling 911, etc., because if you come up close they're plainly not thinking rationally and you'll likely just become part of a brawl.

One time I saw a group of 5 guys fighting with another 5 guys. In that case you don't get involved, you get the fuck away from it before the start shooting, and you call 911.

So, for the record, I've done this multiple times.

 

[TQM]

Herodotus

Did it occur to you that you are doing exactly what you accuse me of? Do you know how lacking in self-awareness that is? And you are doing it on an escort review board!

Now I'm also sure that you don't need a lecture from me on responsibility - but for heaven's sake - this is a thread I started and it's a thread on responsibility. What the fuck else do you think I'm going to be talking about?

Lastly, I won't and can't accept your insane restriction on discourse -

"I'd like to engage in some serious discussions with you, so long as I was not told that I was giving you the wrong answer."

I reserve the right to judge you right or wrong, wise or foolish, well-spoken or dimwitted each and every time I so want to and fully respect your ability to do likewise.

If you find me smarmy and arrogant you are perfectly free to not respond. But so far, your contribution on this thread is to call me in one post a "shit disturber" and in the next "smarmy and arrogant."

If you had taken the time to actually read this thread you'd find I've thanked those who've responded and really only disagreed with two posters - one who continues to misread the question and another who gives an impossible answer. But if you don't like me don't get involved! It's easy! Ignore my threads! Ignore my responses.

Spend more than a few seconds thinking about that.

 

[TQM]

fuji

Wrong on all counts.

You can't be both 0% and 100% responsible. Not morally. Not according to law.

You contradict yourself repeatedly in your interpretation of the law. If you are found guilty, say, of "negligence" as you put it, you need to just spend a few moments pondering what you've been found "negligent" about. The fact that you have been found negligent in a court of law shows that you are not in any way 0% responsible for what happened.

 

[papasmerf]

this is a thread I started and it's a thread on responsibility.

Actuly you thread is about: If you do something you know is wrong and an innocent dies, can you live with yourself.

 

[TQM]

no papa, it's not.

It's on responsibility.