Friday, November 16, 2012

Diffusion of Responsibility

On Thursday, our discussion of Foucault lead to a deeper conversation of responsibility. Foucault's belief is that everything is everyone's responsibility because it is your community. This lead to a discussion of whether starvation in Africa is our responsibility because we are aware of it. This was interesting because our discussion turned to defending why we are not responsible for these situations. I thought that one of the most interesting questions that was brought up was why we are more invested on showing why we are not responsible than why we are. As said in class, I think it is because people to not want to have to feel blame or guilt if something goes wrong in what they have taken responsibility for if they are in a group setting. However, if one is alone and something goes wrong, they are more willing to take responsibility because it is obvious that they are the only ones who can fix the situation. This "diffusion of responsibility" concept reminded me of videos that I had seen in psychology. In the video, psychologists set up two different cases of smoke coming through a door. In one case they had one individual witness the smoke while they were taking a test, and in the other a group of individuals witnessed the smoke. It was interesting because in most cases the individual would respond by getting help, but in the cases with a group of individuals, they would all occasionally look around at the others to see if they were reacting to the smoke and no one would respond. I think that this study says a lot about how humans react differently to responsibility in communities. 

1 comment:

  1. Last year in my Intro Psychology class we discussed the Death of Kitty Genovese. Honestly, if I would have been Kitty’s neighbor, whether I was the only witness or one of the 100 witnesses, I would have helped her. If I saw someone screaming, being attacked, etc., even if it is my worst enemy, I would do something. I thought that was human nature but the death of Kitty proves that it is not. I would want someone to help me. The Kitty Genovese story always reminds me of a poem by Martin Niemoller:

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
    Because I was not a Socialist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
    Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Those who did not help Kitty or would not help someone in a similar situation may make the argument that “it was none of my business” or “I thought someone else was going to help” but it the rolls were reverse, if they were the one being attacked, if they were the one being stabbed, if they were the one bleeding to death while 38 witnesses watched, they would want someone, everyone, anyone to be in their business and help. No one can make the argument that they would not want help.

    ReplyDelete