Thursday, November 29, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Responsibility in Modern Society
Over the course of this last week, we have discussed the ins and outs of human responsibility. We attempted to give an objective definition, and then followed up by describing how far it extends. Although we weren't able to give an outright definition of responsibility, I believe that the best way to define responsibility is to describe its bounds. Of course, like most subjective matters, establishing concrete boundaries where responsibility ends is almost impossible.
I believe that although we can spread the word "blame" or "responsibility" around with a fair amount of ease (despite not being the exact same thing), the impact of the associating the blame with persons can only be a result of direct involvement. That is, we cannot punish someone who did not commit a crime merely because they may have been influential. The clearest examples are those involving the law. When someone breaks a law, consequences are dealt based solely upon claims that can be backed up by evidence. We do not punish someone for possible influence on the person who committed the crime. Of course, that does not mean that a person who pays someone to commit a crime goes free. Although there is admittedly a great deal of gray area in reality, how are we to punish those that did not have a concrete role in the crime? However, often the bounds of blame reach farther than may be realized.
![]() |
A picture that Seung-Hui Cho sent to NBC news before the shooting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ChoSh.jpg |
One example in reality of this would be the Virginia Tech shooting. The person who was taken to jail was punished because he (and only he) could be convicted of physically committing a crime. (The shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, is shown in the image to the right). Yes, you may say that the school environment did not give enough support, or that the students around him were not aware enough, or that his parents gave him a wrongful upbringing. However, how are we possibly able to say that the school, the students, or his parents were to blame. Simply enough, we can't. Even if we were to say that we, though not directly involved, were responsible, or to blame, what difference would this claim make in society? None, whatsoever. The impacts of our claims to responsibility only extend as far as reality allows.
In this way, we have defined what responsibility is. We have shown that responsibility (not blame) is defined by the means of impact it has in reality. I do not believe that we were all partially responsible for the Virginia Tech shooting. Nor do I believe I am responsible for the murders constantly occurring in Memphis, nor the failure of the school systems or government. This is because, firstly, there is no possible way that I could spread my time or efforts enough to solve all of those "responsibilities" of mine. Secondly, we cannot be concretely defined as responsible for the actions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)