Responsibility

[Golden Applesauce]

I don't buy the idea that being part of a system absolves you of any responsibility.

Here's the hypotheticals:
Alice is an employee at a computer service center.  As part of their procedure, on all jobs they run a virus scan.  If the scan flags a program as a potential virus, she is  to inform the customer that a virus has been found on his computer, and offer to remove it for $120.  She isn't allowed to tell the customer that their scanning software has a very high false positive rate, or that she is 99.9% confident that this particular program isn't a virus.  She's supposed to scare the customer into spending $120 on a "service" that will actually inconvenience them when their video drivers no longer work properly or something.

Bob is a door-to-door computer "repairman."  He goes to people's houses (he especially goes after elderly clients) and offers them to give their computers a check-up, free of charge.  If they accept, he runs a virus scan that somehow never fails to find a virus (even if there is no virus to be found!) and offers to remove the "virus" for $120.

I think it's pretty clear that Bob is running a scam.  Alice is merely implementing a scam that someone else came up with - but both of them are deceiving other people for a living.  The only difference is our society allows Alice to say it isn't her fault, because she'd be out of work if she refused or reported her company to law enforcement or whatever.  Bob would also be out of work (and unable to feed his family, etc etc) if he stopped scamming or reported himself, but we don't consider his blatantly criminal activity to be a "job" ... despite the fact that he does essentially the same thing for a living as Alice, just with less regular wages.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

I find this to be a major barrier in my attempts to create a consistent morality for myself, because I really do believe in radical personal responsibility and at the same time know I'll never live up to its standards.

Because on one hand, allowing evil to happen through inaction is equivalent to directly "causing" it.  (I should note that I have no idea what the word "cause" means anymore, after reading Hume).  On the other hand, anything I do allows many evils, great and small, to continue.  No matter what I do, there is always some evil going around that I could have prevented (albeit perhaps by allowing a different evil).  The utilitarians would have that I should find the course of action that permits the minimum of evil, and then not worry about the others because I did my best.  But I'm pretty sure that the "minimal evil / maximal good" route involves me abandoning my friends, family, and education to go the the exact place where I can get the improve humanity the most - which is probably where humanity is the worst, and somewhere hot with lots of disease and little internet access.  Since I am not doing any of that, I know that I am in some small way responsible for tons of things that are wrong in the world.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

* I put that bit in special for Dok. 

Why the fuck do you do that shit?

I'm out of this conversation.  Later.

Because I meant it in jest  I thought that it was obvious that my last sentence was a joke. I thought you would find it funny...sorry.

[Doktor Howl]

* I put that bit in special for Dok. 

Why the fuck do you do that shit?

I'm out of this conversation.  Later.

Because I meant it in jest  I thought that it was obvious that my last sentence was a joke. I thought you would find it funny...sorry.

Apologies.  I take the wink emote as condescension.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

And in that scenario, there's no excuse for driving the bulldozer.

BINGO

The farmer was screwed by the system, no doubt. However, it was his responsibility, he took out the mortgage.

But he didn't crash the market through stupid, short-sighted market manipulation.  The banks and steel companies did that.

That doesn't matter. If the Farmer says "Please give me monies, if I don't pay you back you can bulldoze my house" then he IS responsible for either paying the debt or letting someone hit his house with a bulldozer.

Responsibility isn't necessarily a bad or negative thing. It just is. If you act you are responsible for the act, even if something you accounted for (the US economy and people buying your crop) falls apart, it doesn't abdicate you of responsibility.

The bankers etc may well be responsible for fucking the economy and the farmer's ability to pay for his house... so they are responsible for their actions.

And at the end of the day the bulldozer driver is responsible for physically knocking down the house. Even if he is otherwise an awesome dude.

[Doktor Howl]

That doesn't matter. If the Farmer says "Please give me monies, if I don't pay you back you can bulldoze my house" then he IS responsible for either paying the debt or letting someone hit his house with a bulldozer.

Sure it matters.  If I loan you money, and then take deliberate or negligent steps that ensure you can't pay it, then the responsibility is on me...IE, the money may still be owed, but only after the actions I took have been rectified.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

That doesn't matter. If the Farmer says "Please give me monies, if I don't pay you back you can bulldoze my house" then he IS responsible for either paying the debt or letting someone hit his house with a bulldozer.

Sure it matters.  If I loan you money, and then take deliberate or negligent steps that ensure you can't pay it, then the responsibility is on me...IE, the money may still be owed, but only after the actions I took have been rectified.

I find that I gotta agree with that... as long as the bank/mortgage company is actually responsible for the calamity in some sense.

[Doktor Howl]

That doesn't matter. If the Farmer says "Please give me monies, if I don't pay you back you can bulldoze my house" then he IS responsible for either paying the debt or letting someone hit his house with a bulldozer.

Sure it matters.  If I loan you money, and then take deliberate or negligent steps that ensure you can't pay it, then the responsibility is on me...IE, the money may still be owed, but only after the actions I took have been rectified.

I find that I gotta agree with that... as long as the bank/mortgage company is actually responsible for the calamity in some sense.

They were...They weren't the ONLY culprit, but they were the prime mover.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Apologies.  I take the wink emote as condescension.

Well, hell... no wonder we often end up pissed at each other... I generally take it to be j/k. I will try to be more careful with its usage!

That doesn't matter. If the Farmer says "Please give me monies, if I don't pay you back you can bulldoze my house" then he IS responsible for either paying the debt or letting someone hit his house with a bulldozer.

Sure it matters.  If I loan you money, and then take deliberate or negligent steps that ensure you can't pay it, then the responsibility is on me...IE, the money may still be owed, but only after the actions I took have been rectified.

I find that I gotta agree with that... as long as the bank/mortgage company is actually responsible for the calamity in some sense.

They were...They weren't the ONLY culprit, but they were the prime mover.

So that brings us to a question of ethics. Two different questions:
Who is responsible for the farmers house payment?
How should an ethical bank behave in the situation?

I maintain that the farmer is still ultimately responsible for whatever contract he signed (the poor bastard is screwed either way), but that an ethical bank would consider it their responsibility to fix their fuckup before aiming at their customers. Though an ethical bank is likely an oxymoron.

[Doktor Howl]

So that brings us to a question of ethics. Two different questions:
Who is responsible for the farmers house payment?
How should an ethical bank behave in the situation?

I maintain that the farmer is still ultimately responsible for whatever contract he signed (the poor bastard is screwed either way), but that an ethical bank would consider it their responsibility to fix their fuckup before aiming at their customers. Though an ethical bank is likely an oxymoron.

I also maintain that the farmer is ultimately responsible.  However, if banks create an environment where payment simply isn't possible, then foreclosure should be stayed until such time as payment is possible.

It's the only way to make the bankers think farther ahead than their next 6 martini lunch.

[Doktor Howl]

I find this to be a major barrier in my attempts to create a consistent morality for myself, because I really do believe in radical personal responsibility and at the same time know I'll never live up to its standards.

Hobbes said something about that.

Impossible standard is impossible.  That's why the Angel of Apathy™ exists, to come along and whack you in the head when a foolish consistency gets all wedged in your brain.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

So that brings us to a question of ethics. Two different questions:
Who is responsible for the farmers house payment?
How should an ethical bank behave in the situation?

I maintain that the farmer is still ultimately responsible for whatever contract he signed (the poor bastard is screwed either way), but that an ethical bank would consider it their responsibility to fix their fuckup before aiming at their customers. Though an ethical bank is likely an oxymoron.

I also maintain that the farmer is ultimately responsible.  However, if banks create an environment where payment simply isn't possible, then foreclosure should be stayed until such time as payment is possible.

It's the only way to make the bankers think farther ahead than their next 6 martini lunch.

Damn, we're in lock step on this!

[Cramulus]

can I just say that I really enjoyed this thread? Not just because I ran my mouth off, but because it's a good discussion, and it was engaging without being emotional.

to everybody

[Scribbly]

Right back at you! It was a good discussion, and I really enjoyed seeing how it developed.

for all!