Why Do We Assign Additional Blame?

Deezy

Deezy

Active member
You’re driving down the road and, in a moment of inattention, you run a red light. In one universe a cop pulls you over and gives you a ticket. In another universe you hit a little old lady and kill her.

In the first universe you’re just an ordinary motorist. In the second you’re a shameful monster. But you had no control over the presence of the little old lady; the same (small) list of controllable actions were available to you in both universes.

If our moral responsibility extends only to our voluntary actions, then in both universes your only transgression lies in running the red light. Why then do we assign additional blame for hitting the lady, an outcome over which you had no control?

 
why do we blame ourselves for our actions only if we hit her. if you just get a ticket its not that bad but then when you cause damage suddenly your action is horrible as fuck.
 
You're thinking of it wrong. The whole reason there is a consequence of running the red light is that you had the possibility of hurting someone (the old lady).
 
But he is wondering why, by going through the same set of actions in both cases, you should have different consequences. It is just a matter of luck (or lack of it in this case) that the old lady died. It is sort of interesting.

OP, do you think people have moral responsibility for any of their actions?
 
What if you shppt bullets in the street, you just a regular redneck, but if someone walks in the way of your bullet, your a "shameful monster"
 
it just depends on who's looking at it. to me, theyre both equally negligent which is where your wrong doing-lies.

do i think youre a monster because you slipped up in a freak accident of inattention and killed an old lady? no, probably just think youre a dumbass who needs to be more careful and got real unlucky. youre gonna get fucked in probably both civil and criminal court and thats just how it goes. i think of you same as i would for just getting the ticket in the first scenario (all hypothetical, not calling anyone a dumbass lol)

but say something like this occurs because your were under the influence.. would piss me the fuck off and i would still see you as trash, even if you simply drove home and with no accidents and were laughing about it the next day, just as much as i would if you had taken out a family on the way home
 
because consequences heighten the extremity of the situation?
i dont really know what doesnt make sense here.
if you play with fire, you're a dumbass.if you play with fire and get third degree burns on your face, you're still a dumbass.
 
do you even know what you are talking about?
hurling down a concrete road in a 2 ton steel killing machine or firing 9mm ballistics down the same street seem pretty similar to me...
 
this is exactly the reason that i always run people over when i'm biking, longboarding skiing, driving, etc.

definitely not my fault if someone gets in my way when i'm trying to go somewhere. everyone should always just be stayin the fuck out of my way in my goddamn universe.
 
ohh myy mother... i thought you meant the guy driving at first, was thinking why would i give a shit about his mom lol. but honestly this is probably one of those situations where you wouldnt really know how you would react until it actually happens but i dont think id think of him as a monster unless he took his eyes off the road because that idiot was doing super inappropriate like grabbing his weed out of the back or writing a completely useless text. even in those situations id be more likely to call a person a dumb motherfucker than make the stretch to "monster", insinuating that they are some sort of evil heartless person

but say is that person was distracted by their child choking on food in the back seat, or is sick and started going through an uncontrollable coughing/sneezing episode. yeah they could pull over but lets just say the timing was just right on everything for something awful to occur. i think it would be unfair and very blind to flat out lay an insane amount of blame onto somebody
 
You guys are missing the point. We assign blame in life because we can't accept that tragedy is a part of life. We can't say that yes sometimes things go horribly wrong in life and part of life is dealing with and expiriencing that. Instead we live in denial and say oh it was that person that caused this to happen.
 
images


read this as this guy saying it
 
Running the red light and getting a ticket=just one illegal act.
Running a red light and killing said old lady= 2 illegal acts. Extra blame is put on because you are now a murderer.
 
Even though the two sets of circumstances leading up to the consequences are the same the outcomes are decidedly and obviously different and that is what matters. It is pointless to sit around and ask what if.

 
disagreement-hierarchy.jpg


i don't think anyone has made it above the third rung, and i think even a greater majority missed the point and the triangle entirely.
 
and again...
Why then do we assign additional blame for hitting the lady, an outcome over which you had no control?
the lady being there was out of your control.
When you get home with a ticket its like. "i ran a red and a cop was there, shit", however, if you hit the lady suddenly running the red is much worse (so is hitting the lady, this is out of the question) but running the red light is infinitely worse worse. You think it is that much worse, you assign additional blame onto yourself over something you cannot control. why?
 
This isn't that god damn hard. They make it illegal to run red lights because if you do you have the chance of running over the old lady. If you run the red light and don't hit the old lady you get in trouble because you could have hit an old lady. If you do hit te old lady you put more blame on yourself because you did the exact thing they were trying to prevent, actually hitting the old lady. Fuck.
 
Being inattentive when there is just a red light if different then if there is a person there, because the level of inattentiveness for hitting a person is much greater than just running a light.
also morally, its because we are know that it could be us that ran a light, so that doesnt matter, but no one wants to believe they would actually be able to kill someone and we choose to believe that someone who hit a lady is a worse person than us, even if it was an accident. but at the same time, running a light and hitting someone is much harder to do than just running the light
 
OP, i think the issue with your argument is the example you have given. It seems that most people who are responding can't get past the fact that its your fault if you run someone over. Running a red light at 5am on an empty street is a lot different than running a red light when theres a little old lady in the middle of the road.

I assume you're suggesting that, in both circumstances, the driver is not paying attention to the road for whatever reason; thus they are not making a reasonable decision to run the red light, but are simply distracted. If the driver conciously assesses the situation and deems it safe to run the red light, then his action is much different than if he is distracted and runs the red light (regardless of whether or not he runs over an old lady).

So, to attempt to rephrase:

You're driving down the road on a normal day. Its not too busy. Your cell phone rings/your kid in the back seat is being a little cunt, and you are distracted for a short while. You run a red light:

A) Nothing happens. You turn back and pay attention to the road and keep driving

B) Someone is in the middle of the road and you hit them.

Does that make it any more clear?
 
But potential harm is not a valid justification for punishment. That law is not morally justified in the first place. Therefore, to O.P. I believe that running the red light is not the wrong, so one should never feel bad about running a red light. Killing an old lady is an impermissible wrong, so that is why we place more moral relevance on that act.
 
The way I see it is that absent the old lady, you could just be in a really big hurry and not feeling like waiting at an empty intersection. With the old lady there, you really managed to fuck up, and not only blow right thru a red light, but also some poor old lady.
There's also the fact that you killed someone, regardless of it being a mistake or not, society tends to frown on that kind of shenanigans.
You also can't really argue that the universe decided to put a lady in your way because it was your dumb ass that wasn't watching the road, no some omnipotent being.
 
Endangerment, attempted murder, attempted burglary are all punishable for potential harm. Hell basically every law is punishment based on potential harm.
 
take a moral philosophy class. Theres no right answer to this stuff. Thats why ethics make for such an interesting/ frustrating discussion.
 
True, but unless I am mistaken, OP was looking to strike up a moral discussion, and if you think all laws are morally justified, then you are living in ignorance.
 
Fair enough but it's a somewhat irrelevant/pointless discussion because of how our social contracts work.
 
Because if murder isnt punished then society would break apart. Generally people dont appreciate manslaughter
 
If thats the way you feel then DON'T take a moral philosophy class haha. But I get where you are coming from. it's not really for me. I'm an engineering student. All absolutes. I just kinda dabble, but mostly it all frustrates me, as it should anybody.
 
Its not additional blame you fucking pot head. You ran a red light. It affected only you. It could of affected others negatively, so you take a hit for it. You ran a red light, you hit a lady. It has now affected both you and the lady. So you have to take a much harder hit for it. They are not the same scenario.

Would you prefer the consequences be the same regardless of who was affected? Would you prefer that the speeding ticket be the same if I was going 6 mph over and didnt affect anyone or if I was going 60 mph over and ran others off the road?
 
why do you feel bad if it is out of your control?
like a roller-coaster operator pressing the go button... then the ride exploding killing 20 young people. the operator will be devastated and feel like he is attached in a way or part of the problem of some horrible event that he had no control over. i hit a raccoon driving, i slammed on the breaks but still couldn't stop in time, so i had little control of what happened but i feel as if its my fault that i ran over the raccoon even thought i couldn't control the outcome.
most of you are all correct in the argument that you are fighting, im just having a hard time trying to tell you exactly what im thinking... maybe im a little crazy and have no idea what im talking about... yeah. but ill post this anyway :D
 
everyone in this thread better look the fuck out when they crossing the road, or walking anywhere for that matter, cause i drive wherever the fuck i want whenever i want and if you get in my way i will not hesitate to run you down. just last week i was driving through a baseball diamond and killed an entire little league team, but it wasn't my fault, it was theirs, for not getting the fuck out my way.
 
You feel bad because you negatively affected someone elses life.

You don't feel AS bad when you run a red light and no one gets hurt, but you get a ticket (warning) because you COULD have. You feel bad when you run the red light and hit someone because now someone else has to live with YOUR mistake.

What ever additional blame or additional guilt, is jusitified by the fact that your mistake now affects others than yourself. I don't understand what you are missing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top