Where does responsibility end and unreasonable expectations begin?

[Zukin]

Lots of personal development materials say that a person should take complete responsibility for everything in their life, and I try to live by that.
This idea is prevalent in many cultures and there are often situations where people blame someone for not behaving according to "common sense."

For example, you've probably heard these types of statements:
1. "Why doesn't he just take responsibility for his drinking problem? Everybody knows alcohol is addictive."
2. "Doesn't she know that taking in more calories than she burns keeps her fat?"
3. "Didn't she know that a guy like him would cheat on her?"

On the other hand, many people would be horrified if a civil engineer said something like this regarding the bridge collapse:
"Duh! Weren't they smart enough to realize that the bridge was old and was supporting too much of a load during rush hour? They should've just waited until they could have traveled over the bridge at a more reasonable time."

When does something stop being common sense (which you should take responsibility for) and start being specialized knowledge (which not everybody may know)?

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by Zukin

When does something stop being common sense (which you should take responsibility for) and start being specialized knowledge (which not everybody may know)?

I would say that the answer to that is what maturity is all about...

Maturity should give good judgment and good judgment is what is needed to make the decision...

Of course, I also believe that we should be on the "personal responsibility" side as much as possible... because it is usually when we are the one who is responsible that we can effect changes...

.

[openeyes]

Originally Posted by Zukin

"Duh! Weren't they smart enough to realize that the bridge was old and was supporting too much of a load during rush hour? They should've just waited until they could have traveled over the bridge at a more reasonable time."

To me, specialized knowledge about the bridge doesn't even seem necessary. Rush hour tends to mean more traffic, more stress, and more accidents whether you're going over a bridge or not, and I generally do what I can to minimize driving during congested periods.

Regardless of time of day, by using a car one is accepting the risk of serious injury or death. Most people accept that risk, whether or not they're fully conscious of it. For many it's worth the convenience offered, while others may structure their lives to largely take the need to drive daily out of their lives.

My view is that it's more empowering to take responsibility for everything, and to try to really be conscious of what's going on. It's a turn off to see how some people go through their lives describing most everything that befalls them as "not their fault".

[Brutha]

You shouldn't think about responsibility as an objective quality.
It is more about personal commitment.

[openeyes]

To look at it in a more general way, people have some control over what they prepare for and how they respond to things. A person may not have direct control over whether or not an earthquake occurs, but they can prepare their home to cope with one, or choose to live elsewhere (provided they have the resources).

Also you may not seem to have control over whether a complete stranger comes over and insults you, but you can decide how to respond. Most of the men in my dad's family have bad tempers but I chose to develop self discipline and to learn to process emotions rather than have them make me do things I'd later regret.

Risk assessment is something I constantly perform, whether that means delving into specialized knowledge or not. Doing so provides me with the ability to take risks that most people would be uncomfortable with, while also deemphasizing common behaviors that I deem to carry more cost than benefit. For me, taking responsibility for my well being increases freedom/personal power.

[Ilya]

For example, you've probably heard these types of statements:
1. "Why doesn't he just take responsibility for his drinking problem? Everybody knows alcohol is addictive."
2. "Doesn't she know that taking in more calories than she burns keeps her fat?"
3. "Didn't she know that a guy like him would cheat on her?"

I know that's beyond the point but I'd say these statements fall under "it's not your business" category. Judging other people like this behind their backs is quite irresponsible.

But let's talk about the real issue.

On the other hand, many people would be horrified if a civil engineer said something like this regarding the bridge collapse:
"Duh! Weren't they smart enough to realize that the bridge was old and was supporting too much of a load during rush hour? They should've just waited until they could have traveled over the bridge at a more reasonable time."

The people would be offended on such a statement mainly because this sounds like a lame excuse by a person who tries to shift his responsibility for messing up his job and causing deaths of other people.
(I'm assuming the engineer was responsible for keeping the bridge in good shape.)

The question is - should the engineer be responsible for deaths in such a case? I believe the answer is yes. But that does not eliminate the responsibility of the users of the bridge!

Sometimes we delegate our responsibilities to government officials, contractors and so on. We do it in the same way we delegate work.
But any manager knows, that delegating the work does not necessary mean that he won't have to do this job. It is so, when the delegation process works. If it fails, the manager will have to do the job, or will have to delegate it again.

The same is with responsibility. We delegate it to other people or organizations so they will help us with carrying out our responsibilities. If they are successful, everyone is happy. If they are not, they are responsible for not doing their part of the deal, but we are responsible for delegating to them and ultimately for the end result of any action.

The "you are responsible for everything" motto in PD literature is not like "pleading guilty" in litigation.
Taking responsibility for everything is the empowering position that puts ourselves in control. When accepting total responsibility we do not waste time and emotions for blaming somebody, even if others objectively failed us. We pretend "as if" we are responsible for the situation and that lets us to act immediately, gives us the ability to give response to any situation, which is the literal meaning of the word "responsibility".

In this context something being specialized knowledge is irrelevant.

[Zukin]

Thank you for your responses, everyone.

To do correct risk assessment just to make it through everyday life, though, it seems like a person needs professional-level training in at least the following subjects:
Medicine
Nutrition
Mechanical Engineering
Business
Law
Criminal Justice
Negotiation
...and probably more

Or you can take the Law of Attraction/Huna/prayer approach: "bless the present, trust yourself, expect the best"

[Brutha]

To do correct risk assessment just to make it through everyday life, though, it seems like a person needs professional-level training in at least the following subjects:

You don't need to be able to do correct risk assessment to be responsible.

Let's say a politican favors minimum wage. He has no clue about the effects of minimum wage on employement and is therefore unable to do a correct risk assessment of whether the minimum wage policy harm employement.
Then he pushes for the minimum wage and creates unemployement as a result.

According to your idea of responsibilty the votes should say in the next election that the politician isn't responsible for the unemployement, because he lacks the ability to correctly assess the risk (if he would have that ability he wouldn't have pushed the policy).

I rather think that that politician is responsible for the unemployment and because of his responsibilty it is less likely that I will vote for him again.

For responsibility to have any meaning it has to apply in those cases where someone is unable to assess the risk of his actions.

[Zukin]

Responsibility and blame is a fascinating topic to me. For example, what do you all think about these situations:

If a person gets cancer, does the blame lie with companies for releasing toxic chemicals that are implicated in cancer? Or, does it lie with the individual for not reading scientific journals like Cancer Cell and minimizing their exposure to those chemicals?

If a person gets mugged, does the blame like with the police for not providing sufficient coverage? Or, does it lie with the individual for leaving their house at that time?

And, does blame and the past not matter and the only thing that matters is that a person takes responsibility for their future?

[Zukin]

Actually, ignore my previous message. It looked like Ilya already answered it in his post.

Thank you for your comments everybody!

[Brutha]

I don't really think that we need the concept of "blame".

Let's say we have a consensus in our society that those companies cause the cancers.
Now there are a few possibilities:
1) The companies take responsiblity and reduce those effects.
2) The goverment takes responsibility and regulates/bans those chemicals.
3) Some group takes responsibilty and organises a boycot (either peaceful or armed) of those companies to drive them out of business.
In reality it is most of the time a mixture of those. The threat of the goverment taking responsibilty over the problem might drive the companies to take a bit of responsibilty.

That system underlies over democracy and is much more effective than blaming the companies.
In a culture where people blame other people nothing gets done.

[medaille]

This is an issue that comes up all the time.

Especially, when I talk politics with conservatives (being that I'm more liberal and we often have different opinions).

I really agree with Zukin about this being an important issue, because the end result is that no one takes any responsibility. While this is true in many areas, I think modern medicine is one of the most disgusting areas to me. There is just so much for us to know just to live a healthy lifestyle in this confusing chemical ridden world, and almost all of it lies outside mainstream knowledge (although I think the 80-20 rule plays a big part here).

There's a lot that's done outside of our control/responsibility that if we were to try and take the control back would seem excessive. An example would be fluorides in water/toothpaste. Almost everybody consumes fluoride in their water and their toothpaste, but there still is a very small but healthy debate as to whether it should be used as a supplement for people. Almost nobody chooses to take on that responsibility because it is still outside their awareness to even make a choice.

Or homeschooling vs unschooling vs public school vs private school. What's the best method of helping your kid do well with their life? Again, most people are on autopilot and make the socially common decision.

Regardless of the the topic to be debated, I think the media does a tremendous job of stifling the discussion and make a polarized debate out of what should be a more organic exchange.

We're at a point where the essential task for our society is to remove the ignorance from society and to remove the structures who solely exist to perpetuate ignorance. How do we do that? I wish I knew. I just wish I could turn the control narrative off and let people talk normally for a while. It seems like the only answer that makes sense is to just stop listening, but that's hardly a solution that reverses the issue.

[Ilya]

Originally Posted by Zukin

It looked like Ilya already answered it in his post.

Yay! I've learned to answer questions before they were asked! Always wanted to do that

[Ilya]

Originally Posted by medaille

I really agree with Zukin about this being an important issue, because the end result is that no one takes any responsibility.

That is a great generalization. I think that most people take a lot of responsibility most of the time. Many people, however avoid taking responsibility for difficult tasks. Even that is not true. We are responsible (again - being able to response) for the most events in our lives. Sometimes our response is effective, sometimes it is not. The truly irresponsible people are those who are called "not responsive" in accidents reports. Pun is intended. That's the irony with the immature people who try to give their responsibility away. They just can't! Instead they stay responsible but their responses get much worse. Inaction is one such response. But don't confuse inaction with being irresponsible. We usually use these interchangeably, but that's obscuring what's going on.

While this is true in many areas, I think modern medicine is one of the most disgusting areas to me. There is just so much for us to know just to live a healthy lifestyle in this confusing chemical ridden world, and almost all of it lies outside mainstream knowledge (although I think the 80-20 rule plays a big part here).

I'm surprised, how people from developed countries complain about their medicine. You don't realize how good your medicine meets basic needs. Of course there are cases of invented diseases and medications being aggressively advertised as commodities. But that's beyond the business of life-saving.
If you are unhappy with modern medications, think about this. In my country you can not be sure if the pill in the bottle is genuine. It can be a placebo made of flour and sugar, it can be counterfeit pill made from some poison, because it has the same color as the real pill, it can be some outdated pill stock, that has gone bad and simply repackaged. How would you go about that?
I'm not writing this to whine about the life here. It's not as bad as it sounds, really.
But I'll use it as a case study of acting responsibly. In US you may wonder if some pill may have an adverse side effect on your health. We are talking about very small risks here. (Risk, by the way, is defined by the expected damage of something bad happening times the probability of this something bad happening). So in case of US we are talking relatively small damage, times small probability.
In developed countries in addition to whatever risks you have in the US you are facing lethal or crippling damage with a much higher probability. And suddenly you must act responsibly. Every time you choose to use medication you must weight the risk of doing it vs. the risk of not doing it.
And you control these risks. You choose the pharmacy wisely, you look at the medication packaging carefully. You actively look for trusted sources of medications, preferably the doctor you know personally. And... you don't use medications unless absolutely necessary.

I think I can remember most of the medicines I've taken during my life. And I was not a particularly healthy kid. I was diagnosed with a variety of bone cancer at the age of 2. I've had a 2 inch hole in my scull. The main cure was radiation therapy, but all medications I was fed were calcium supplements to enhance the regrowing of the damaged bones.
I almost never was given medications for flu, colds, and usual kids illnesses. All you need is some tea with honey and lemon for sweating and baking soda plus table salt plus a drop of iodine for sore throat and running nose. No Coldrex, no nothing else. Of course you stay in bed for a week instead of not staying in bed at all, but that's how our immunity system works - it needs time.
So my point is that Pareto 20% in case of medicine is - don't take anything unless absolutely necessary. If a doctor prescribes something - ask what will happen if you don't take it and decide if you can live with it. That's acting responsibly without studying in med school.

Regardless of the the topic to be debated, I think the media does a tremendous job of stifling the discussion and make a polarized debate out of what should be a more organic exchange.

This is blaming. What can you do, despite whatever the media is doing?
Controlling your life is very easy, if your life doesn't have unnecessary parts.
If you have inherited the unnecessary parts from your parents - reduce them.
If you drink pure water - you are fine. If you eat simple, natural food, you are fine. If you teach your kid how to develop regardless of what school he is in - the kid is going to be fine. It's when you start adding strange things to your life, then you are taking additional risks, because making strange things involves strange processes. Then assess these risks and make a decision.

If you are concerned with the good of other people - become your own media. Do what Steve is doing. Those who are ready to listen, will listen. Well, you are doing it already, aren't you?

[Brutha]

Regardless of the the topic to be debated, I think the media does a tremendous job of stifling the discussion and make a polarized debate out of what should be a more organic exchange.

The real question is: What is the altanative to the media?

In addition isn't the call for completly dropping fluorides also polarized in one direction?

What would a "organic" exchange look like?

[Chado2423]

The only problem with the "take full responsibility" approach is the negligence of proper knowledge. A person may want to stop smoking, but not which way is best for them to do so... by replacing the old habit with a new, or going cold-turkey, by going to a clinic, or what have you. Simply having the desire is not enough, secondly suppose they are comfortable in their choice (the "comfort zone", no matter how painful it may be), and may not fully realize they have a problem until something about it affects them in a startling way, awakening them to reality.

[lizthefair]

Originally Posted by Ilya

The "you are responsible for everything" motto in PD literature is not like "pleading guilty" in litigation.
Taking responsibility for everything is the empowering position that puts ourselves in control. When accepting total responsibility we do not waste time and emotions for blaming somebody, even if others objectively failed us. We pretend "as if" we are responsible for the situation and that lets us to act immediately, gives us the ability to give response to any situation, which is the literal meaning of the word "responsibility".

I think Ilya's spot on. For me the PD concept of accepting responsibility is a tool to help me make sure I've done everything I can to be successful, help others, improve the world, etc. The place where the tool breaks down is when you start feeling guilty for the parts of the equation upon which you didn't have any influence or when you use it to browbeat others into accepting their responsibilities.

Like all tools, accepting personal responsibility should be used to the point it helps you achieve your goals. When you start hitting yourself with it you should be put it down.

[Brutha]

Originally Posted by Chado2423

The only problem with the "take full responsibility" approach is the negligence of proper knowledge.

I don't see that responsibilty leads to negligence of proper knowledge. The responsible person seeks the knowledge.

A person may want to stop smoking, but not which way is best for them to do so... by replacing the old habit with a new, or going cold-turkey, by going to a clinic, or what have you. Simply having the desire is not enough, secondly suppose they are comfortable in their choice (the "comfort zone", no matter how painful it may be), and may not fully realize they have a problem until something about it affects them in a startling way, awakening them to reality.

Responibilty is not about desire but about action.

[Chado2423]

Originally Posted by Brutha

I don't see that responsibilty leads to negligence of proper knowledge. The responsible person seeks the knowledge. Responibilty is not about desire but about action.

I did not mean that responsibility leads to negligence of knowledge. I meant that if one is negligent of the proper knowledge, s/he will by default be irresponsibe in that area in some context. I.E. if one does not know that he should be seeking knowledge out, then he is negligent of said knowledge. Some knowledge is more profound than other types, and we may not know how to seek that out, or even that we should, until we are faced with a particular circumstance that requires us to do so. I hope that clarifies what I meant a little better.