IDENTITY=Behavior There are no CAUSELESS crimes or innocent evils

by Terry 89 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Terry

  Babies born to drug addicted mothers. We can say with near certainty these babies will grow up into socially maladjusted individuals and have a high propensity for criminal activity. We know their neural systems regulating behavioural control have been completely messed up due to in utero drug exposure. Now, are they to blame for this?

  Let us reframe this a bit to get a more unbiased starting point.

  Imagine a great basketball player who is in a car accident. After months of therapy he rejoins the team and cannot perform at all at the optimum level necessary to be of use to his team. Should the team keep him?

  You see, the context decides the outcome.

  The basketball player who was permanently injured cannot help the team win as a player. But, he can continue to be loved, valued, honored and such.

  Now, lets readjust this scenario. Let us imagine that this same player is in an accident that damages his brain and causes him to be violent, unstable and ill-tempered. He did not choose this set of behaviors electively. But, the consequences of his actions post-accident must be dealt with.

  Before the accident the player is one person and after the accident he is simply a different person.

  The baby potentially was one person before exposure to drugs in utero and another afterward.

  The actual baby born is no longer the potential baby. We deal with the person AS IS. Blame is not issue. The deeds are the reality.

  In other words; Justice consists of dealing with results in terms of their cause and effects. Blame is an evaluation societally which tempers the consequences according to the volition of the one acting. IF you can choose X and yet you choose Y, then, you are responsible. If you cannot BUT CHOOSE Y, you are dealt with differently as far as blame. But, you may spend your life locked up anyway!
• 

  Terry

  Does knowledge provide the child with an "excuse" to be an under achiever, or to behave in an inexcusable manner? Would withholding the information, if it would give the child a normal starting point, a "clean slate" so to speak, without excuses for poor achievement or behavioural problems, cause the child to grow up differently?

  When we are born we don't really know if we shall end up being tall or short, fat or skinny, type-A or shy. We don't kow if we are ambitious and competitive or retiring and insular. We discover who we are and what we are as we meet resistance and opportunity.

  For example. When I was 20 I was very very shy. I was a Momma's boy with no father figure. I did not play sports or compete. I was frightened around men or social situations. Yet, when I was placed in Jail and subsequently, Federal Prison I was able to endure and propser even in the face of attempted rape. I did not so much choose all this as I discovered what I was made of when faced with certain options. I became what I was.

  What we know (or think we know) is also a kind of elective mental state up to a point. I bristled at the fact I spoke poor english and came from a family of people who never even graduated from high school. I couldn't stand it! I learned 16 new words a day from the dictionary and devoted myself to self-education.

  What I transcended was not my SELF; it was my situation.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Terry

  Why separate the deed from the doer? Aren't we fooling ourselves?

  Our personality stems from who we are as an identity. Our behavior is OUR behavior and is not a causeless phenomenon. We must own what we do.

  My question to you is, are we sinners because we sin? Or, do we sin because we are sinners?
• 

  DanTheMan

  Hitler becomes a rather nice fellow who simply had wrong ideas and needed some love and therapy.

  "Hitler" is a commonly-held placeholder in our brains for a no-longer assembled assemblage of molecules that descended from the human-type of molecule assemblages who made sounds and facial contortions that inspired like-minded molecule assemblages to do sufficient harm to other molecule assemblages of a slightly different lineage so that they would no longer be living molecule assemblages.

  Nobody is responsible for anything, because nobody is an unmoved mover. There's no such thing as "you" or "I". There is no ghost in the machine.

  Dan, anti-essentialist
• 

  OUTLAW

  Terry..Read your thread this morning..I thought I`d think about it till evening.So I did..LOL!!.....Some crimes are from,really stupid kids.They cross the line and don`t know it.....Some people know exactly what they`re doing.It`s to thier advantage to f*ck somebody over..There is a difference..Just wanted to point it out...OUTLAW
• 

  Terry

  Terry: do you think evil people ought to be killed?

  People who do damage to the lives of others which cannot be repaired have to be held accountable.

  The accounting should make sense in a practical way.

  Make them earn money through labor to compensate victims while keeping them away from mainstream society.

  Anybody who harms a child should be a candidate for permanent removal.
• 

  Terry

  My question to you is, are we sinners because we sin? Or, do we sin because we are sinners?

  The archer misses the bullseye not intending to miss. This is the word picture the Hebrew carries for "sin".

  Sin is identified in terms of the disapproval of a Supreme Being.

  Practically speaking; there is no such thing unless you have an actual Supreme Being.

  But, for the sake of argument.....

  God's standard is a deliberate mismatch for humans because God made humans LESS than what He is, hence; inferior.

  A square peg does not fit exactly into a round hole.

  Consequently, the SIN is inescapable for humanity.

  If God held us to a more human standard of behavior (a fair standard, that is) only deliberate actions would count as sins.
• 

  Terry

  Nobody is responsible for anything, because nobody is an unmoved mover. There's no such thing as "you" or "I". There is no ghost in the machine.

  You could have fooled me, Dan the man, because you've moved the keys on your keyboard and created a post while identifying your causation particularly as originating from you.

  This would tend to negate your assertion above.

  How do you explain that?
• 

  Terry

  Terry..Read your thread this morning..I thought I`d think about it till evening.So I did..LOL!!.....Some crimes are from,really stupid kids.They cross the line and don`t know it.....Some people know exactly what they`re doing.It`s to thier advantage to f*ck somebody over..There is a difference..Just wanted to point it out...OUTLAW

  When we cause harm; the harm is done. The victim of a harm done suffers the harm. The law exists to restore what has been damaged. The restoration is the important focus first followed by a penalty for the causer of the harm.

  Why/how/under what circumstances the causer of the harm carried out the deed is the second consideration.

  A deliberately caused harm is treated more severely than a stupid mistake for a reason. Society wants to discourage deliberate misdeeds. Murder is deliberated before hand and manslaughter is circumstantial accident.

  When we hold people to account for their mistakes or their deliberate actions we restore the balance, ideally.
• 

  OUTLAW

  Terry..Good Evening..Just about to hit the sack....."When we cause harm,harm is done".True enough.....Should people be accountable?..Absolutely!.....Still..There is a difference in inexperienced youngsters and outright criminals.....Good Night JWD!...OUTLAW