Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Responsibility Calls for Action

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2015 5:13:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Inaction in any area of one's life defers responsibilty to the collective. A person is responsible in that he, or she, acts.

Responsibility of one's self not only includes his, or her, material independence but, also, independence of thought. It is possible and, in fact, is, mostly, the case an individual is responsible in some areas of his, or her, life while being neglectful in others. Take, for instance, an individual who is self-reliant in that he, or she, makes enough money to support himself, or herself, yet relies on the collective for his, or her, spiritual needs, conforming to the tenets of an inherited religion. On the other hand, there are individuals who are independent thinkers yet depend on the support of others to meet their material needs.

The goal of the balanced life is not to isolate one's self from the collective either physically or emotionally but to find a healthy equilibrium between one's self and the collective; it is not, alone, found in the action of the individual but in the rest he, or she, finds in the group.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/24/2015 5:46:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Reliance on a group for an aspect of life that is weak. Is that a rule of thumb?

In order to sustain the individual, either he, or she, takes responsibility for himself, or herself, or the group takes responsibility on his, or her, behalf.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2015 5:29:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
So it is safe to say that people bring their problems to the group. A question I would ask you, do people always consciously know that the group is helping because of a weakness?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2015 7:58:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
So it is safe to say that people bring their problems to the group. A question I would ask you, do people always consciously know that the group is helping because of a weakness?

No. I do not believe the individual is always aware of his, or her, needs, which is made obvious in people who are either psychologically immature or suffer from a neurological disorder. Of course, these are exaggerations; but, to some degree, I believe we all suffer from a lack of mental capacity.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2015 9:41:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/24/2015 5:46:47 PM, s-anthony wrote:
Reliance on a group for an aspect of life that is weak. Is that a rule of thumb?

In order to sustain the individual, either he, or she, takes responsibility for himself, or herself, or the group takes responsibility on his, or her, behalf.

How about everyone take responsibility for themselves and if somebody doesn't then instead of the group picking up the flak, we just let the weak die.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2015 10:18:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
How about everyone take responsibility for themselves and if somebody doesn't then instead of the group picking up the flak, we just let the weak die.

The problem I see with this is the myopic perspective one has of not depending on society, whether consciously or unconsciously, to meet certain needs. I can assure you no matter the degree of autonomy complete autonomy is not feasible.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 2:03:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If the individual is not always aware of his/her weakness, does the group, have right to act independently of the individual and intervene on the individual's behalf?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 8:17:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If the individual is not always aware of his/her weakness, does the group, have right to act independently of the individual and intervene on the individual's behalf?

Does a parent have the right to feed and clothe one's child? To ask such a question is to ask if society has the right to provide for and protect its own members.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2015 9:31:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/26/2015 8:17:50 PM, s-anthony wrote:
If the individual is not always aware of his/her weakness, does the group, have right to act independently of the individual and intervene on the individual's behalf?

Does a parent have the right to feed and clothe one's child? To ask such a question is to ask if society has the right to provide for and protect its own members.

Yes understood parents care for children. By laws and morally. I guess I'm thinking say family members. Is it ok for brothers and sisters to huddle down against a family member (sister or brother) they deem wrong and intervene to make changes?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 4:42:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Yes understood parents care for children. By laws and morally. I guess I'm thinking say family members. Is it ok for brothers and sisters to huddle down against a family member (sister or brother) they deem wrong and intervene to make changes?

Not only that, but society, itself, must intervene in the lives of its members to protect itself. The argument does not lie in the responsibility of society versus the responsibility of the individual, but in the extent the collective takes responsibility for the individual versus the extent the individual takes responsibility for oneself.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 9:34:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't know that I fully understand. You said society intervenes. What is the deciding factor as to the part of society that intervenes and what happens when that part intervenes over the objections of the individual?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2015 8:31:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't know that I fully understand. You said society intervenes. What is the deciding factor as to the part of society that intervenes and what happens when that part intervenes over the objections of the individual?

A society is not made of completely autonomous individuals. A society must have cohesion and the ability to govern its members.

In submitting to the will of the collective (society), the individual is not only giving up self-autonomy (to a degree) but also personal responsibility (again, of course, to a degree). For instance, the individual is not alone responsible for the infrastructures of his, or her, society but collectively society provides for things that are beyond the capacity of any individual. In relegating one's responsibilities to society, the individual, to such an extent, is also giving up personal freedoms.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 12:38:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
But infra-structure is not a weakness of the individual but is necessary in a collective sense. As the infra-structure provides the basic living necessities as food, water, shelter and clothing.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2015 8:59:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
But infra-structure is not a weakness of the individual but is necessary in a collective sense. As the infra-structure provides the basic living necessities as food, water, shelter and clothing.

It is necessarily provided by the collective because the individual does not have in his, or her, power to provide it for oneself. Therefore, the individual necessarily depends on the collective.

We are a social species; we do not live entirely isolated from each other. Throughout history, the most extreme form of punishment has been to isolate the individual from the group, such as the practice of a nation or tribe exiling an individual or the modern day practice of putting a prisoner in isolation.
SaxxyBlues
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/29/2015 3:40:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
When did gathering food and water and shelter and clothing shift from the individual to the collective? I'm just curious as to what you think.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2015 9:06:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
When did gathering food and water and shelter and clothing shift from the individual to the collective? I'm just curious as to what you think.

A person who is not dependent on the infrastructures society has set in place for food, water, and shelter, is a rare bird.

Nevertheless, even if an individual were to provide for his, or her, material needs, completely, on his, or her, own, the individual could not meet his, or her, social needs without the cooperation of the group. For many years, researchers have documented the effects complete isolation has had not only on the psychological welfare of the individual but, also, the physical welfare, as well. People are social animals and can only thrive in the presence of other people. Homeless people who often experience little social interaction with other people are more prone to dissociative identity disorder, and a citation taken from Wikipedia states, "Psychological effects...," of solitary confinement, "...include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis."