Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT 15-19 November 2010 (1796-1800)
enigma3d:
--- Quote from: muffin_of_chaos on 16 Nov 2010, 12:21 ---
--- Quote from: Emperor Norton on 16 Nov 2010, 11:43 ---As a comment, knowing who overstepped (who is to "blame") can be useful, but doesn't need to be dwelt upon, and doesn't need to be seen as the ONLY problem. People have to be responsible for their actions. How can they do that if they are never held accountable for any of it? (hence blamed).
--- End quote ---
Blame as an assignation of guilt is never really justified unless it's universally decided that people should feel certain ways, and in secular society there isn't the obligation to feel certain ways but merely to follow laws. Such that the actor who is thought to be guilty is thought to have failed morally.
Most relationships are similar to secular society, in that interpretation of how one reacts feelings-wise to a given situation in a relationship is allowed to be fluid so that it can take into account many potential factors that an outside observer has little ability to judge. Moreover, the outcome of said situations tend to have consequences that could not be predicted by the actors of the relationship.
Blame as an assignation of responsibility works, but other words or phrases might serve better that don't have connotations of moral failure or of consequences. Like "responsible" or "caused by."
Dora's actions caused the situation, and Dora's thoughtlessness and Marten's inability to communicate clearly while distraught makes them both responsible for the escalation later. But the blame associated with each one's actions is not clear-cut, as it isn't clear what exact damage has been caused or what exact mental processes took place to ensure that what did happen spiraled out of each's control.
--- End quote ---
I agree. The problem with assigning blame, is that people most of the time have perfectly good reasons, in their minds, for acting the way that they do. Its really hard to assign guilt when motivations seem justified, given the information that the person has access to at the time.
Understanding someone's situation is far better than condemning them for it.
melly21:
I woke up at 6am this morning and the first thing I did was come back here and read the 5 pages of replies I missed :S :psyduck:
:psyduck:= awesome!!!!
Plus I would be sad (but a little happy and relieved) if Marten and Dora broke up (have they broken up?) do I think they have been a perfect couple? No. Who is? But if they have indeed broken up then this could lead to some serious character development for the both of them, actually even if they haven't broken up I am hoping this story arc leads to some serious character development for both of them.
Thing is I don't really like Dora as a person, as a character I think she is freaking awesome, she brings in great drama and she seems to be the one who causes the most passionate debates and responses in the forum and between me and my mates that read QC.
I won't bother getting into the whole "Who's to blame" argument because everyone (mostly everyone) has made excellent points and I really, really have nothing of considerable importance to add to that discussion :D
westrim:
--- Quote from: westrim on 15 Nov 2010, 08:06 ---I should be getting all uppity and start quoting people to respond to in Marten's favor, but I just increased my understanding of the universe a little bit, so I'll sit this one out :angel: . And all the other arguments that occur as we argue over things Jeph has already decided and will draw tomorrow/day after/sometime in the next week.
--- End quote ---
*glances at 11 pages* I'm glad I followed my advice, or I would have gotten nothing done.
IanClark:
I'm going the opposite way. Because of this discussion, I'm getting tons of shit done. I'm writing an essay on the subject of blame from a philosophical standpoint as we speak for a daily column I write. Doesn't pay the bills but it gets my name out there.
Emperor Norton:
--- Quote from: enigma3d on 16 Nov 2010, 12:26 ---
--- Quote from: muffin_of_chaos on 16 Nov 2010, 12:21 ---
--- Quote from: Emperor Norton on 16 Nov 2010, 11:43 ---As a comment, knowing who overstepped (who is to "blame") can be useful, but doesn't need to be dwelt upon, and doesn't need to be seen as the ONLY problem. People have to be responsible for their actions. How can they do that if they are never held accountable for any of it? (hence blamed).
--- End quote ---
Blame as an assignation of guilt is never really justified unless it's universally decided that people should feel certain ways, and in secular society there isn't the obligation to feel certain ways but merely to follow laws. Such that the actor who is thought to be guilty is thought to have failed morally.
Most relationships are similar to secular society, in that interpretation of how one reacts feelings-wise to a given situation in a relationship is allowed to be fluid so that it can take into account many potential factors that an outside observer has little ability to judge. Moreover, the outcome of said situations tend to have consequences that could not be predicted by the actors of the relationship.
Blame as an assignation of responsibility works, but other words or phrases might serve better that don't have connotations of moral failure or of consequences. Like "responsible" or "caused by."
Dora's actions caused the situation, and Dora's thoughtlessness and Marten's inability to communicate clearly while distraught makes them both responsible for the escalation later. But the blame associated with each one's actions is not clear-cut, as it isn't clear what exact damage has been caused or what exact mental processes took place to ensure that what did happen spiraled out of each's control.
--- End quote ---
I agree. The problem with assigning blame, is that people most of the time have perfectly good reasons, in their minds, for acting the way that they do. Its really hard to assign guilt when motivations seem justified, given the information that the person has access to at the time.
Understanding someone's situation is far better than condemning them for it.
--- End quote ---
Wooo, quote tunnel. I'll be honest, some of this is just semantics imo. When I say I blame someone for something, I mean their actions caused it. So saying that Dora's actions caused the situation (or the start of it anyway) and Dora is to blame for the situation (or the start of it anyway) go through my head the same way. And a lot of the dictionary definitions seem to follow the same idea.
I'm not saying throw blame out there and condemn them, I'm saying, you can't figure out what to change until you know what happened to CAUSE the situation, and then figure out what caused what caused the situation, etc etc.. There is a lot of responsibility to go around on this argument honestly, which is usually the case with all real arguments. Acknowledging that responsibility is the first step in changing it.
EDIT: Also, holy christ page 12 :psyduck:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version