Quote:
Originally Posted by this is fun  Okay, but let's say you warn them about all health risks, present good arguments, and they still refuse to quit or they don't quite get it, the bottom line is there's nothing else you could do. |
What I'm asking is whether this would truly be the end of it, i.e. do you acknowledge that they don't quite get it? Obviously, in the specific case of smoking it's an entirely difficult issue (see the link I suggested to James81), since smoking heavily alters behavior and decision-making.
Quote:
Returning to the tree  Why do you assume they wouldn't check out what's the best way to do it? When I said I'd be okay with it, I meant provided it was safe. You said it yourself you believe people are interrelated so I'd like to believe that other people would be careful about whether their decisions have consequences for others as well. Provided all is safe, would you have anything against that tree?
[...]
But it doesn't mean they have to do the same thing. I agree that some of my decisions may affect other people and the other way around, other people's decisions may prompt me to want to do something, however at the end of the day, I have to accept responsibility for my actions and consequences if I decide to follow someone's example.
On the other hand, maybe my decision would have good consequence for someone else as well.
[...]
Yes, but it depends to what extent, not all things influence me in the same way. And also, maybe that influence could be a good thing.
|
This requires a totally new discussion, but it is the basis of most of the things I say here, and most of my personal behaviors.
I have thought about this thoroughly even from a non-philosophical point of view and one lateral insight prooved to be useful: the cultural backgrounds on
individual responsibility.
From what I gathered, the American and British societies have many individualistic elements in their culture. Everyone is responsible for themselves, their career, their decisions, their whole life.
(And this may also be one reason why it is so common to hear that each wants to mind their own business... which, following insights from James81, may also correlate with
impatience).
Compare Italy and the USA. Even though quality-wise it might not be the top, the Italian health care services are entirely free for everyone. A surgery that in the USA can cost up to $20,000 is free+a service expense of around $50 in Italy. You can find numerous other examples in social policy: America is generally more "free"... but from what I perceive also more careless towards the less lucky individuals (here in Continental Europe, we always often hear horror stories about doctors letting patients die just because the patients have no more money/insurance...).
The reason for this difference, according to many social scientists, is that, generally, European (and Oriental/Asian) cultures acknowledge the existence of misfortune. A criminal may have become one because of a bad upbringing, poor education, and other negative conditions that influenced his personal life history and behavior.
To put it in very extreme stereotypes, US would entirely attribute the criminals' behavior to his own responsibility and as a measure against people like him, create stronger police enforcement. In Europe, policy-makers would try to improve education in the poor regions and help parents give their children a better life.
These are just many examples to show that according to some, individual responsibility is just a way to "play the cards we're already dealt with".
I grew up in Europe (which may influence my views), but mainly from what I have learned through psychology, biology and social sciences, I think that individual responsibility is very limited.
Actually, [negative] social trends would not exist if there truly was such a thing as individual responsibility. You can say "100 people are truly being irresponsible by planting trees in their apartment" or you can say "These 100 people are simply following a trend, totally unaware of the consequences of their actions, but also lack that information."
A possible compromise to our different views is this:
We can have individual responsibility of what we know.
If I
know that planting the tree will destroy the building, and I still do it just to follow the trend, I am being irresponsible.
Still, even in this case, there's a lot of evidence (not just in Europe, but scientifically, globally) that social influence is generally more powerful than individual decisions.
Some American scientists have called it "groupthink" (
Groupthink - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), and as you can read, most of the measures against it must be taken OUTSIDE, and not
by the members.
Another good example depicting what I'm talking about is this:
Milgram experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Out of which I would like to quote especially the following:
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.
"Authority" here may be your supervisor, but also your social circle which grants you acceptance and protection.
These are just a few of numerous statements depicting that individual responsibility is often absent, or merely subjective.
The implication of all this is that... I think the reason to "meddle" in other peoples' business is valid, especially if we take into consideration the possibility that "people
don't know what's best for them"! This may sound a bit strange, but, yeah, they are the basis of my behavior.
The question whether it is more practical and efficient to actively meddle/discuss or to "live by example" is another one... I opened this thread to ask whether it is right to have the
intention to convert others to your beliefs and behavior, if you're truly convinced about them and can back them up.
(more...
Social influence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )