the blame train

due toa recent article posted in the "sompletely off topic" forum, i was reminded of a philosophical problem from way back when in philo 101.

where do you place blame? take any situation that you know of. columbine is always one that gets people prickled. or the typical scenario that follows:

"so this lady is cheating on her husband. Her husband however, is a lazy git, without a job nd tends to get drunk and beat her. shes out having a affair with her dashing young prince charming, and must now go home. on the way home, her usual route is blocked by an idiot unable to drive who has somehow managed to cause a wreck on the two lane highway, so she must detour. along the detour, her car breaks down from a lack of oil, caused by the local oil change guy being a general moron, and putting too little oil in. while shes out, and has the car hood popped, she gets shot and killed by an armed robber, even in sight of several people, who merely do nothing."

so whose to blame for her death in this scenario? the husband, the poor driver, the oil change guy, the pedestrians, the robber, the lady herself?

basically, where do you place blame?

Ordinarily the blame is put on the one who actually killed her... the armed robber.

But having everything in her day lead up to her being in the wrong spot at the wrong time could have simply been fate.

But fate is not ending up with an abusive husband... She should have set her life on course right from the start.

So my conclusion is that anything can happen at any time and the only thing you can do is live your life the best you can.

Ordinarily the blame is put on the one who actually killed her... the armed robber.
you're actually one of the few that actually would say that.

take the columbine example. everyone kept looking for someone to blame. the parents, the music, the movies, the video games, the kids that picked on them. very few people actually laid blame on the kids pulling the triggers.

I fully agree. Each person can be blamed for something, mecanic for not changing the oil, husband for being abusive etc but only the robber can be blamed for causing her death.

Basically the mecanic should lose his licence, the husband should be charged for abuse, the idiot driver should be pay for the damage, but only the robber should be charged and pay for her death. The rest are only guilty of their particular fault but not of the murder.

Unfortunatelly people will use blame as a tool to push their own objective. Lets say the mecahnic was an imigrant, anti imigration groups will use say that it was the general imigration phenomena's fault that she got killed(they will not care that the robber/killer is a native citizen)

"To each his own;"

Plot
Thought
Objective

No one can make you 'do' anything, unless they manage to totally cloud your thought, but todays video games/music/movies are not powerful enough to make any sane person go crazy. Like Neutrino said, blame for an action comes from "each his own" objective/discrimination.

But thats a completely different topic altogether.

Edit: I also forgot to add the influence of the media... but I was specifically talking about our entertainment industry. (I am very sick of people trying to blame video games. It's FAKE! NOT REAL... idiots :p )

This may sound as a shock, but she is the one at fault. Instead of divorcing her husband, she has an affair, so in turn, she is an adulterer who now pays for what she did. I was only suspected of stuff in my school and I still got screwed over bigtime.

Sounds more like a crock to me.

The armed robber was to blame.

if the other people changed their ways,it may have affected the outcome in as far as the lady would have been elsewhere, but unless the robber had taken a different course of action,he would probably have ended up shooting someone else instead.
The other players in this story are not creating direct consequences that lead to her death.

As for the rest of the argument,Columbine,etc...we all have our agendas to push, and if we can establish a link between a bad event and something we dislike, we'll usually buy into it. The bottom line ,though, is that nobody put the guns in the hands of those two kids and told them to do it.

Yeah the armed robber is the only one to blame. Those other people just put her in the wrong place at the wrong time. You can play the "What if" game all you want to try to determine what would have happened if she did this or that, but only the burgler pulled the trigger. As with Columbine, I think a lot of people felt like they needed to punish somebody but couldn't since the kids killed themselves. It seemed like the matter was unresolved. It was also a chance for people to throw their political views into the mainstream (gun control, violence in the media and games, music, etc)


*EDIT*
You should have made this a poll. It would be interesting to see how everyone voted

its interesting actually

they did a pyschological study using a very similar study, and found that most people blamed the woman. however, when they made it male in the story (abusive wife and all) they blamed the abusive spouse for making the poor guy have an affair.

seems like people in general are more likely to blame women period.

very few people actually blamed the robber.

however, ive come to notice, the few people that actually frequent the philosophy forum tend to be at least a bit above the average IQ, so our results may be scewed

its interesting actually

they did a pyschological study using a very similar study, and found that most people blamed the woman. however, when they made it male in the story (abusive wife and all) they blamed the abusive spouse for making the poor guy have an affair.

seems like people in general are more likely to blame women period.

very few people actually blamed the robber.

however, ive come to notice, the few people that actually frequent the philosophy forum tend to be at least a bit above the average IQ, so our results may be scewed


Well the results here could also be skewed because the test had plenty of interference. We saw each other's answers and you (the tester) also participated in it.


Of course i'm not sure if you meant it as proper test or more of an open discussion. As a test it would've been probably better to PM us individually and ask us.

Of course i'm not sure if you meant it as proper test or more of an open discussion. As a test it would've been probably better to PM us individually and ask us.
im more of a discussion type person. i just think its interesting that ive seen the "story" presented both in my pyschology courses, as well my philosophy courses. its fun to see what people think.

im still waiting for the "it's all fate's faults...it was just her time to go. part of god's plan" answer

im still waiting for the "it's all fate's faults...it was just her time to go. part of god's plan" answer

I'm still waiting for that answer also. I wouldn't have said even if I was religious, because your still shifting the blame to something else.... god.

It was totally the killers fault. As said above everyone in the situation did not have a direct effect on what the shooter did. Personally I can not see how someone would try to blame anyone else, it doesnt make sense to me, but that is the point of this discussion i guess. Each individual is responsible for something else, but not in regards to the murder.

In a situation like that, I would be more interested in what responsibility the woman took for her own fate. She could have divorced the husband, checked the oil herself or ducked when the guy shot at her. Easy really.

We live in a society of people unwilling to accept accountability for their actions.

It was the armed robbers own fault. Nobody made him pick up that gun and decide to maim someone. (sorry, I don't belive in fate/destiny) we all have brains and were given the ability to make a consious choice. We are not programmed animals (I'm going to be a murderer).

Do women get raped because of fate/destiny? Or was it because of some prick who couldn't control himself? (made a consious choice, "I'm gonna steal some twat tonight.")

due toa recent article posted in the "sompletely off topic" forum, i was reminded of a philosophical problem from way back when in philo 101.

where do you place blame? take any situation that you know of. columbine is always one that gets people prickled. or the typical scenario that follows:

"so this lady is cheating on her husband. Her husband however, is a lazy git, without a job nd tends to get drunk and beat her. shes out having a affair with her dashing young prince charming, and must now go home. on the way home, her usual route is blocked by an idiot unable to drive who has somehow managed to cause a wreck on the two lane highway, so she must detour. along the detour, her car breaks down from a lack of oil, caused by the local oil change guy being a general moron, and putting too little oil in. while shes out, and has the car hood popped, she gets shot and killed by an armed robber, even in sight of several people, who merely do nothing."

so whose to blame for her death in this scenario? the husband, the poor driver, the oil change guy, the pedestrians, the robber, the lady herself?

basically, where do you place blame?

So would you send the woman to jail for getting killed? Nope. The definition of blame is "the one whos at fault". The only faults that the law honors are Murder, robbery, rape, grand theft auto, etc.. etc. The law does not take in account the sequence of events in a persons life that lead up to their death and it definitely does not persucute those factors. However, if the law ever changed(God forbid) and they were stupid enough to do that, than you could rightfully place blame on one of the other factors.

Also I can see how many might say its the womans fault for committing adultry, cheating, and not having control over her life creating bad Karma.

[QUOTE=gmobile1]The law does not take in account the sequence of events in a persons life that lead up to their death and it definitely does not persecute those factors. However, if the law ever changed(God forbid) and they were stupid enough to do that, than you could rightfully place blame on one of the other factors.
QUOTE]If thats the case, and if the laws were to change, then I guess I can blame my parents for bringin me into this world and thus causing all the bad stuff that has ever happened to me. In fact why stop there lets go back further, to their parents and grand parentes etc etc all the way to God which (if you believe in religion) started it all with Adam and Eve.

I can see it now, class action lawsuit against God. :lol:

In the example given, to me, its the robber thats at fault for the death of the woman, not anyone before hand that led her to get to that place/position that eventually led to her death.

TS out (playing devils advocate)

This is real simple, you are accoutable for your actions .... PERIOD ...... the robber pulled the trigger, causing the bullit to leave the gun with enought force to ripe through her body causing her death, the rest of the crap simply lead to her being in the wrong place at the wrong time ...... you are responsible for your actions, drunk or high, you did it ....... if I let something or someone influance my decision making to the point that I do something to hurt someone, shame on me but I am still at fault

The robber pulled the trigger. She could have been a great woman who was out grocery shopping for food to donate to an orphanage when she got shot. Who knows.......Im too tired to be philosophizing.

(abridged)
where do you place blame? scenario follows:

"so this lady is cheating on her husband. Her husband however, is a lazy git, without a job and tends to get drunk and beat her.

Shes out having a affair with her dashing young prince charming, and must now go home.

On the way home, her usual route is blocked by an idiot unable to drive who has somehow managed to cause a wreck on the two lane highway, so she must detour.

Along the detour, her car breaks down from a lack of oil, caused by the local oil change guy being a general moron, and putting too little oil in.

While shes out, and has the car hood popped, she gets shot and killed by an armed robber, even in sight of several people, who merely do nothing."

so whose to blame for her death in this scenario?


There are several layers, or places, of blame:

First, the woman is to be blamed for having an affair, she should have left the bum. Her husband is to blame there also, but that's where the husband's blame basically ends.

Prince Charming? Unknown blame. He may know the woman is married, in which case he is to blame for the affair, but again his blame basically ends there.

Idiot crashing? He's to blame for the crash and ensuing traffic jam, but that is where his blame ends; everything else is beyond his control.

Oil change guy? Definitely to blame for not filling the oil up correctly and the subsequent engine breakdown. BUT the woman (and it could be argued, her lazy husband) are also partly to blame for not checking the oil. Also, any decent Prince Charming would check his girlfriend's oil once and awhile (pun intended), so PC has a bit of blame for her car breaking down. But there is no blame assignable to any of these people for WHERE the car broke down, for there is no way to tell just how long the engine will last with a given amount of oil.

The route the woman took back to her own home was her choice. Could she have made another? If so, it's happenstance that she chose that way to go home, and no blame can be assigned for choosing a certain route over another.

Then she's out of her car and gets shot. The robber is carrying a gun with the intent to use it for a robbery, and is the direct cause of and therefore carries the blame for the woman's death. For without the robber, her death would not have occurred.

The crowd: It is not clear from the example if any blame is upon the crowd which does nothing; perhaps they saw the robbery in progress, but from a distance and could not get there in time to assist, or in fact were moving to call the police. Perhaps things were happening so quickly that they were unable to do anything; perhaps there is the appearance that they did nothing but were actually doing something else(as with the husband with pregnant wife in the crowd, for example, was trying to protect her and the baby from the robber so therefore did nothing for the woman, but did in fact do something for his own wife). Perhaps the crowd were accomplices to the robbery, in which case blame would be assigned. Perhaps they could have acted but did not, in which case they could be assigned some blame.


You could also take the negative case, which is where the major debate occurs:

For example, remove the robber, and the death does not occur.

Remove the husband, and perhaps it won't occur, but the woman could still have had an affair.

Remove the oil change guy, probably wouldn't break down, but could have, or the woman could be having the affair and stopped for something at the store.

Remove the accident, no detour and therefore not at the robbery scene.

Remove Prince Charming (or insert different PC, pun intended again) and her route is different.


Finally (heavy sigh) you can monkey with time to change the blame.
It's her parents' fault she died, if they had conceived a child at another time, then it could have been a different child with a different life story.

Or, if the guy who crashed his car had crashed into her and involved her in the accident

Or if she had taken a different route [but what if there was a robber there, too?]


Ahhh, philosophy. Plenty of discussion but hardly any concrete answers. (Philosopher responding: but there ARE no concrete answers) :)

This is real simple, you are accoutable for your actions .... PERIOD ...... the robber pulled the trigger, causing the bullit to leave the gun with enought force to ripe through her body causing her death, the rest of the crap simply lead to her being in the wrong place at the wrong time ...... you are responsible for your actions, drunk or high, you did it ....... if I let something or someone influance my decision making to the point that I do something to hurt someone, shame on me but I am still at fault

:1:

I have discussed this problem about 10 years ago. My opinion hasn't changed...