Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
“Who is to blame?” = “Who is bad?”, – for me, the wrong formulation of the question. Nobody.
It seems to me that the question about responsibility makes sense, but this is a completely different question: “What should I do?”
With any professional mistake, for example, only it makes sense.�
This is a question of 1) how to minimize the consequences, as much as possible, 2) what to do in the future to systematically prevent such errors, 3) what will be the social and legal reaction to the error (and this is also about pp 1), 2))
Two more things.
The analysis always follows an algorithm: first – what was done successfully, then-what should be done differently in the next such situation. This is at least based on your own mistakes, even when analyzing other people's.
Responsibility IS ACTUALLY, objectively, always distributed among all participants in the situation (now the feminists will see their own and destroy me). But it is pragmatically useful, if you are a participant in the situation, to proceed from full acceptance of responsibility for everything that happened on yourself. Remember: responsibility is a question of “What to do”? – That is, if I am a manager, and my subordinates messed up, it is useful for me to assume that all responsibility is on me. THEY don't need to talk about this in any way, it will be constructive for THEM if they consider all the responsibility as their own, at their own level.�
Please note that I am not taking the victim of violence here, there is a special situation with PTSD, but in general, the closer a person is to a healthy state, the more clearly they should be brought to an adequate attitude to responsibility for their lives. (Not to “guilt”!! It is impossible for an adult not to take responsibility for his life on himself, in principle, fundamentally. Do you agree?)
The closest analogue in my experience is the analysis of cases of maternal mortality in maternity care commissions (or obstetric and gynecological, I don't remember the correct name).
That is, if a pregnant woman or a woman in labor has died, and this is related to pregnancy, they call in a huge audience, with a maximum of colleagues, EVERYONE who from the doctors somehow led the woman during pregnancy, and they do a complete analysis for EACH one, under a microscope. What I did right, what mistakes I made. They give him the floor, ask him questions. They make a decision. – Both on the person, and on his medical institution. “And it's not exactly about 'guilt'. This is what you did right, what mistakes you made, and what to do so that neither the doctor himself nor those present will ever make them again.
And-usually, errors are detected at every stage. No one is perfect.
I think this is really a complete analogy with the situation that you suggested to consider.
And if they put the guy in jail, they won't acquit him. – By the way, I would start the analysis with the fact that-plus! “I didn't kill myself.
Guilty of what? Murder? Killer. If it's not self-defense, it's always a killer. Who is to blame for being bullied? The boy's parents who couldn't raise him. What is your question? Who should I blame? It will be hard, especially when everyone is to blame, but everyone is different.
The class teacher, the head teacher and the director are to blame for the downward curve of reducing the penalty, and, of course, the adults with whom the child lived and his parents are to blame.
The killer is to blame. His parents are also to blame, because they failed to raise a person who can adequately respond to bullying and stand up for themselves (and their loved ones).
I will also add that the bully rarely mocks those who do not allow themselves to be mocked.
The provocateur is primarily to blame. In this game, there is no guarantee that you will not receive an answer later. So note to all lovers of bullying – the victim can and most likely will resist and the methods of her resistance will be extreme. Yes, self-defense is limited by the law, but when the victim sees no other way out of the situation (they won't transfer you from school, parents and teachers aren't on your side, and the harassment is collective) then this method is often the only way out. Therefore, if you are a fan of making fun of someone, keep in mind that sooner or later a psycho with a gun will appear on your way, which you yourself created.
System. The aggravation of the situation instead of finding a compromise and explaining to the defendants their rights and obligations provokes a destructive outcome. But if we ignore the legal aspects and look at the situation without the filter of socialization, then we are left with pure biology and natural selection. One has no brains, the other has balls. The brainless one dies, the macho asshole stays alive. End of story.