Accountability

[Tmac]

It has been postulated by a 21st century philosopher that in order for communication to occur, the initiator is not only responsible for the words they use but also responsible for the words effects on the receiver.

I find that most people don't really want to communicate but more just want to show what they know or disagree with and then look for like minded so that they can hide within the ranks.
Most people go through life is if they were only renting never buying, even those that invest in families don't think beyond 2 or 3 generations, so my question is:

Do I owe you anything, do you owe me anything?

 

[PureX]

Do I owe you anything, do you owe me anything?

I don't think that "owing each other" is the reasoned way of looking at it.

We humans are a social species. We need each other to survive, and to thrive. We need to cooperate for the benefit of all, rather than compete for the benefit of the individual. Because we will not survive or thrive as a species by competing.

So I don't think it's that we "owe each other" anything. I think it's simply a law of human nature that we need to learn to cooperate with each other for the benefit of all of us, rather than compete with each other for the benefit of the strongest, most cunning, and most vicious individuals among us.

And so far, it does not appear that we're making much headway in assimilating this very simple and basic bit of wisdom. We are progressing, but at a very, very slow pace.

 

[Tmac]

I don't think that "owing each other" is the reasoned way of looking at it.

We humans are a social species. We need each other to survive, and to thrive. We need to cooperate for the benefit of all, rather than compete for the benefit of the individual. Because we will not survive or thrive as a species by competing.

So I don't think it's that we "owe each other" anything. I think it's simply a law of human nature that we need to learn to cooperate with each other for the benefit of all of us, rather than compete with each other for the benefit of the strongest, most cunning, and most vicious individuals among us.

And so far, it does not appear that we're making much headway in assimilating this very simple and basic bit of wisdom. We are progressing, but at a very, very slow pace.

Just to be clear, did you respond with a hope to communicate or just to let it be known what you think?

So you don't think we owe each other anything, then what is the reason for being upset for and with the behavior of other's. They don't owe us, we don't owe them, they just did what they felt like doing and it ain't no thing. And yet there is an out cry, again I ask why?

 

[PureX]

Just to be clear, did you respond with a hope to communicate or just to let it be known what you think?

How are these different? Particularly in an initial post?

So you don't think we owe each other anything, then what is the reason for being upset for and with the behavior of other's.

Fear. Self-righteousness. Mostly it's that we want to think we control everything and everyone around us. It's what we humans do. We're not bigger or faster or more numerous than other species; but we are more manipulative than any other species on the planet. Being able to manipulate our environment is our survival skill. Unfortunately, it's also what constantly divides us against each other when we need to unite and cooperate with each other, for each other's benefit.

They don't owe us, we don't owe them, they just did what they felt like doing and it ain't no thing. And yet there is an out cry, again I ask why?

Because we couldn't control them, and that frightens and upsets us. Control is how we survive. We seriously fear it's lack. We crave control so much that we will even accept the illusion of control rather than face our lack of it.

 

[sayak83]

It has been postulated by a 21st century philosopher that in order for communication to occur, the initiator is not only responsible for the words they use but also responsible for the words effects on the receiver.

I find that most people don't really want to communicate but more just want to show what they know or disagree with and then look for like minded so that they can hide within the ranks.
Most people go through life is if they were only renting never buying, even those that invest in families don't think beyond 2 or 3 generations, so my question is:

Do I owe you anything, do you owe me anything?

Respect of your human rights.

 

[Tmac]

How are these different? Particularly in an initial post?
Fear. Self-righteousness. Mostly it's that we want to think we control everything and everyone around us. It's what we humans do. We're not bigger or faster or more numerous than other species; but we are more manipulative than any other species on the planet. Being able to manipulate our environment is our survival skill. Unfortunately, it's also what constantly divides us against each other when we need to unite and cooperate with each other, for each other's benefit.
Because we couldn't control them, and that frightens and upsets us. Control is how we survive. We seriously fear it's lack. We crave control so much that we will even accept the illusion of control rather than face our lack of it.

Its precisely because your motive is unclear that I asked.

It seems to me that we have these expectations, you alluded to them in your first post, on how we are suppose to act if we are to live in and be a part of a society. The problem as I see it, is that they are unwritten and because of that we can pick and choose when we want to honor them. I think that they need to be spelled out, do you owe me anything, do I owe you anything?

I don't think we want to control but right now it seems to be the only way we can insure our comfort.

 

[Tmac]

Respect of your human rights.

If we really believed in "human rights" do you think the world would be in this condition? It easy to say you believe in them but are you their champion?

 

[PureX]

Its precisely because your motive is unclear that I asked.

It seems to me that we have these expectations, you alluded to them in your first post, on how we are suppose to act if we are to live in and be a part of a society. The problem as I see it, is that they are unwritten and because of that we can pick and choose when we want to honor them. I think that they need to be spelled out, do you owe me anything, do I owe you anything?

I don't think we want to control but right now it seems to be the only way we can insure our comfort.

It's not really possible to "spell out" everyone's specific social obligations to everyone else because we don't all think or feel the same way about each other. We don't all want the same things for ourselves or for others. And we aren't all willing to sacrifice to the same degree for social cohesion. And because of this, we can't allow any one of us, or group of us, to gain power over any others of us, lest that power be abused. Which seems to be inevitable whenever an imbalance of power, occurs.

So it's a tricky business; trying to ensure individual liberty while still protecting us all from each other, and doing both of these things equitably and fairly. And the larger the society of humans we're talking about, the more complicated and difficult it all becomes.

 

[Skwim]

It has been postulated by a 21st century philosopher that in order for communication to occur, the initiator is not only responsible for the words they use but also responsible for the words effects on the receiver.

This sounds pretty dumb. Telling someone I want to buy a pack of gum isn't communicating unless I take responsibility for the fact that these words happen to send him screaming out the door? In a trivial sense this is true, but not in any meaningful sense.

I find that most people don't really want to communicate but more just want to show what they know or disagree with and then look for like minded so that they can hide within the ranks.

In as much as you seem to believe that people who show what they know or disagree with isn't communicating anything, just what is your definition of "communication"?

.

 

[osgart]

it's more that we are responsible for how people effect us ourselves.

if I respond by letting things effect me negatively, it's my shortcoming.

I owe it, to promote the general welfare of others, and to be constructive, and not destructive.

if I were helpless, I would still owe this decency to the peaceful, who hold the line of peace.

my question is what do we appropriate, for those who are yet helpless?

I often thought civilization rests on its ability to make the helpless, helpful.

and those that are helpless must do everything in their power to be helpful.

for I think we know that we owe those whom are helpful. and decency is rightfully expected.

but what to do with the helpless, and what would I do with them?

in general decency is owed by all.

 

[Tmac]

It's not really possible to "spell out" everyone's specific social obligations to everyone else because we don't all think or feel the same way about each other. We don't all want the same things for ourselves or for others. And we aren't all willing to sacrifice to the same degree for social cohesion. And because of this, we can't allow any one of us, or group of us, to gain power over any others of us, lest that power be abused. Which seems to be inevitable whenever an imbalance of power, occurs.

So it's a tricky business; trying to ensure individual liberty while still protecting us all from each other, and doing both of these things equitably and fairly. And the larger the society of humans we're talking about, the more complicated and difficult it all becomes.

It obvious that we are teaching our children to behave in this manner, we are not hardwired to act in this manner but it is so easy to learn and reinforced, hell, you make it sound like it would take more than learning a better way, that this behavior is detrimental for the old, which as far as I can tell we'll all experience at one time in our life.

 

[sayak83]

If we really believed in "human rights" do you think the world would be in this condition? It easy to say you believe in them but are you their champion?

I am not a champion of anything. I respect other people's rights as I encounter them. That's all.

 

[PureX]

It obvious that we are teaching our children to behave in this manner, we are not hardwired to act in this manner but it is so easy to learn and reinforced, hell, you make it sound like it would take more than learning a better way, that this behavior is detrimental for the old, which as far as I can tell we'll all experience at one time in our life.

We humans are complex beings. We ARE "hard-wired". Yet we are also teachable. And we are the product of our circumstances, and past experiences. We carry them with us as we move forward in time. We can change, but we resist it even when it's change for the better. We can love and loathe each other at the same time. We can want to do the 'right thing' even while we know we're not going to. And our cognitive grasp of reality is as much make-believe as it is factual.

So progress, for us, is very slow going. We digress as much as we're progress as a cognitive species. And we can't teach our children what we haven't learned yet, ourselves.

 

[sayak83]

I can't tell how many people I've found with similar views who whine and cry when they feel their rights are not respected.

That is what they should do. If I respect other people's rights, they should respect mine as well in return. Give and take. Simple.

 

[Tmac]

We humans are complex beings. We ARE "hard-wired". Yet we are also teachable. And we are the product of our circumstances, and past experiences. We carry them with us as we move forward in time. We can change, but we resist it even when it's change for the better. We can love and loathe each other at the same time. We can want to do the 'right thing' even while we know we're not going to. And our cognitive grasp of reality is as much make-believe as it is factual.

So progress, for us, is very slow going. We digress as much as we're progress as a cognitive species. And we can't teach our children what we haven't learned yet, ourselves.

Would you say that this is a glass is half empty approach, all I hear you saying is reasons that illustrate that humanity is in at best its late infancy, early adolescence stage. I am not arguing against any of that, my point is if its not absolutely clear, I can have my doubts.

Back to my question: Do I owe you anything? Now becomes why is the word "owe" a stumbling block for you?

 

[SalixIncendium]

It has been postulated by a 21st century philosopher that in order for communication to occur, the initiator is not only responsible for the words they use but also responsible for the words effects on the receiver.

I find that most people don't really want to communicate but more just want to show what they know or disagree with and then look for like minded so that they can hide within the ranks.
Most people go through life is if they were only renting never buying, even those that invest in families don't think beyond 2 or 3 generations, so my question is:

Do I owe you anything, do you owe me anything?

As an initiator, you owe me impeccability with your word. As a receiver, I owe it to you to not make assumptions.

 

[Tmac]

As an initiator, you owe me impeccability with your word. As a receiver, I owe it to you to not make assumptions.

Yes, if I want to convey a thought, it is my responsibility to myself to choose the exact word that best expresses my thought, ideally, the receiver listens to the complete thought before making an assumption, with dialogue assumptions can lead to fact or expose the assumption as invalid. It would be foolish of me to assume that the listener was aware of what was or wasn't owed without prior clarification.

 

[Tmac]

it's more that we are responsible for how people effect us ourselves.

if I respond by letting things effect me negatively, it's my shortcoming.

I owe it, to promote the general welfare of others, and to be constructive, and not destructive.

if I were helpless, I would still owe this decency to the peaceful, who hold the line of peace.

my question is what do we appropriate, for those who are yet helpless?

I often thought civilization rests on its ability to make the helpless, helpful.

and those that are helpless must do everything in their power to be helpful.

for I think we know that we owe those whom are helpful. and decency is rightfully expected.

but what to do with the helpless, and what would I do with them?

in general decency is owed by all.

I hope this doesn't sound too simple but for me my first thought is how do I stop seeing them as helpless. Why is it that I let these differences exist in my own mind. Obviously I learned, hopefully I can unlearn. I feel you.

 

[PureX]

Would you say that this is a glass is half empty approach, all I hear you saying is reasons that illustrate that humanity is in at best its late infancy, early adolescence stage. I am not arguing against any of that, my point is if its not absolutely clear, I can have my doubts.

Back to my question: Do I owe you anything? Now becomes why is the word "owe" a stumbling block for you?

It's not a "stumbling block". It's just not the accurate term for an individual human's obligation to himself and his fellow humans. If you insist on using the term "owe", then I'd say that you "owe" it to yourself and to everyone else to cooperate rather than compete with them, because both you and they will achieve more positive results in the long run, through cooperation. Cooperation is the "price you pay", and the long term positive results are "goods you receive" in return.

 

[Quintessence]

There are many interesting things for consideration here, but at this point I feel I must ask - where does this line of questioning intersect with theology?