View Single Post
  #249  
Old 08-01-2019, 02:58 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
I would then ask you to re-examine your position from post #28:
You’ve whooshed me. I don’t see the contradiction.



Quote:
In all three of the counter-examples I provided in post #34 (loan, interviewee, date), it is possible and necessary to judge somebody's personal responsibility. Further, these judgments directly affect people's lives. The loan applicant is granted or denied a loan, the interviewee is granted or denied a job, and your friend might call off a date, all based on your decision alone. Do you still think personal responsibility "has nothing to do with anybody else" except oneself?
Well yes, but I think our confusion is semantic. “Personal responsibility” in terms of conservatism is a value one applies to oneself about how one lives one’s life.

All these decisions you are talking about require that judgement will be applied because they affect the decision maker personally. They affect the decision maker’s personal responsibility.

So, if I am evaluating Fred’s creditworthiness for a loan, I am not a making a personal judgement of him in the judgements sense (“he’s a loser,”. “I’m better than him.”) I am just evaluating whether or not the loan makes sense.


Quote:
Your narrative is powerful, and I thank you for sharing it, but it just doesn't seem relevant. That's not personal responsibility as we have been discussing it, it is just plain old responsibility. The personal responsibility we are discussing is being responsible for one's own actions.
I thought that was exactly what I was doing.
I think I am talking about personal responsibility in terms of a value that you apply to your life, a quasi-philosophy. I think you are talking about in the sense of if I borrow your hammer and lose it, you hold me personally responsible for replacing it.


Quote:
Let me elaborate. Pretend I purchase a chartered flight in Alaska, for sightseeing purposes. The proprietor is also the pilot, and he takes me up over Denali. He starts drinking over my objections and after a while we stall and start falling. He can't regain control and we ditch the plane which crashes below. I land with only minor injuries but the drunk pilot released late (he may have lost consciousness during the fall), therefore I saw him glide into the trees half a mile uphill.

If I keep a level head, I would call the state troopers on my sat phone (if I have one) while setting out to find the pilot. Why go after the pilot? It's not out of a sense of personal responsibility. The pilot is entirely responsible for the whole situation, as far as I am concerned. It was his plane, his drinking, his piloting. I'm in the clear and I'll probably sue him if we make it out alive. I guess you could say I have a small incentive to save the pilot, so I can hold him personally responsible for the mess. There is also the fact that he probably knows the area better than I, and might know how to get to a rest house or how to salvage things from the plane, etc. Neither of those are my primary motivation in going to save the pilot. I would go after him out of a sense of humanity, not personal responsibility.
Yes. We do not bother to define ourselves adt the outset of the conversation (actually, I di, likening it to stoicism). You are talking about PR as owsies, I.e he crashed the plane he owes me.

Last edited by Scylla; 08-01-2019 at 02:59 PM.