Authority and Autonomy

[Harbal]

It's very difficult to blame yourself. Because blaming yourself leads to depression, over-thinking, stagnation, immobility, paralyzation, guilt, stress, panic, disease, and worse, depending on the severity of the blamed action or event.

So who or what do you blame for your being a twat?

[Age]

Blame does damage one's Autonomy when a person cannot attribute Causes to its Sources.

There is SO MUCH TO UNPACK and UNRAVEL here.

1. WHY do you USE capital letters at the beginning of SOME words?

FOR the SAME reason YOU capitalize SOME words AND not OTHERS.

BUT, you either have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE NOR IDEA as to WHY I capitalise some words, or, if you do KNOW, then WHY are you emphasizing some letters? What would be the actual purpose of emphasizing just some letters?

2. HOW does 'blame' supposedly damage one's so-called 'Autonomy'?

Because you damage your Authority when you demonstrate to others, the rest of society, that your Judgment is flawed and cannot be trusted.

BUT WHY do the REST OF 'you', human beings, JUDGE "each other" like 'that', and in 'that way'? Especially considering the way that the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK?

Do some of you ACTUALLY EXPECT "others" to have FLAWLESS so-called 'Judgment'?

Also, to me, absolutely NO one damages thier so-called 'Authority' NOR demonstrates to me that they can not be trusted.

See, ONCE one LEARNS and UNDERSTANDS, FULLY, HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORKS, and thus also KNOWS HOW 'you' human beings, ACTUALLY WORK, then WHY 'the judgment' in ALL of 'you', in adulthood anyway, in the days when this is being written, is just FLAWED, through and from a VERY NATURAL process, becomes ALSO FULLY UNDERSTOOD and KNOWN.

AND, ONCE the WHY IS KNOWN, then PREVENTION can BEGIN, and WILL ALSO PREVAIL by the way.

Society loses confidence in your core Human-ability.

The so-called 'human-ability' was just PASSING PHASE OF the NATURALLY EVOLVING-CREATION.

NOT a one of 'you', human beings, consciously KNOWS what IS Right, and what IS Wrong, in Life. So, WHY go on PRETENDING like 'you' do?

Also, 'the society' that loses confidence in 'its' members, especially for the reasons that you have provided here, could be one classed as one that has damaged its 'authority', 'FLAWED in 'judgment', and one that can NOT be trusted'.

But if ANY one was to make this CONCLUSION or have this VIEW would be yet ANOTHER one who does NOT YET KNOW HOW the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK, NOR has YET SEEN and COME-TO-REALIZE that 'that society', which is just made up of 'you', human beings, is ACTUALLY CONTROLLED and FUNCTIONS SOLELY BY 'you', human beings.

So, INSTEAD OF 'trying to' BLAME 'society', itself, as though 'it' is some self-governing entity, 'societies' function MUCH BETTER when 'its' criticizes are NOT JUDGING and/or losing 'confidence' IN "each other'.

In fact having BELIEF IN "each other" and HELPING and SUPPORTING ABSOLUTELY EVERY one CREATES the ACTUAL 'society' that 'you' ALL WANT to Truly live in anyway.

3. What is the 'its' word REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?

Anything

4. The so-called 'Sources' of 'what', EXACTLY?

Everything

5. The 'cause', or so-called 'Causes' of ALL 'things' IS FUNDAMENTALLY the EXACT SAME 'thing/s'.

No, it's not

But it IS.

WHY do you SAY, and CLAIM, 'No, it is not'?

Do you even KNOW what CAUSES absolutely EVERY thing, at the FUNDAMENTAL level?

6. WHY ONLY WHEN a person can NOT attribute so-called 'Causes' to SOME so-called 'Sources' THEN 'blame', supposedly, does damage one's so-called 'Autonomy'?

Because identifying Causality, correctly, is paramount in human observation and Judgment.

Are you able to identify so-called 'Causality', Correctly?

If yes, then ALWAYS, or just SOME TIMES?

It's about making Choices in life.

'What', EXACTLY, is about making so-called 'Choices', in life?

[Age]

Well, everyone justifies their blame, except for very honest people who can say something like 'I hate you right now, because X happened, but I have idea if that's fair.' Or the political equivalent. But otherwise pretty much everyone, like you, has blame, actively blames and then justifies that blame. So, how does one know one is blaming fairly, not being confirmation-biased, not blaming for near unconscious reasons and looking for justifcation anywhere one can find it, not blaming for reasons other than the one one justifies the blame with, not blaming just one agent when there are others and so on?

IOW if one reads the OP one gets the impression there is a problem with blaming. But now it seems like blame is ok as long as you have good justification.

So Justice then implies an 'accurate' sense or system of Blaming—of correctly/rightly/justly attributing Causes to Sources.

I believe Self-Consciousness and Self-Awareness are required, a rare trait in humanity or life in general. A person needs to "see himself the outside", outside one's own perspective, or from the perspective of others. Empathy is required. Otherwise a person is simply stuck in their own Biases, prejudice, and with contempt. An attack on your opinion, is then an attack on your person directly. This is why most appeal to Emotional arguments and use logical fallacies: Irrationality. This happens because people, most people, are viscerally attached to their opinions and beliefs. "To be wrong", is a personal attack. This is why most people have little tolerance for being considered 'wrong', and cannot detach their personal emotion and investment from their own beliefs/opinions.

It means that many 'strong' beliefs are not reasonable and rational, but unreasonable and irrational.

It means that most beliefs are believed-in, because of the imagined or actual, perceived Benefits of those beliefs, an expectation of Reward for holding certain beliefs.

Blaming society is very general, blaming a faction in society less so, though certainly broader than blaming a person. But I have certainly gotten the impression you blame individual people on the Left, including saying they have no souls or morals.

When it comes to particularly atrocious or grievous crimes, yes, I believe some acts in life are Evil. Those who Cause children/boys to castrate themselves, or Ellen Page and other women to castrate her breasts...that's Evil. We may as well bring back Torture, if Western society and civilization has fallen this far. Evil has returned. I think the targeting of children is particularly heinous and crosses the line.

IOW, some Injustices must be violently rebuked.

Sure, car wrecks are good examples, especially if one wants to point out that blame can be spread out. Perhaps one driver was more at fault or so clearly did something wrong so on that level. But then I had a friend how went from engineer to emergency room doctor and he was outraged by how unsafe cars were made. Then we could blame a society that has facilitated the use of cars and not other forms of transportation. Then I'd need to get into the specifics of the case but police, drivers parents, the way the road laid out and maintained could all be brought to bear as potential causes. And not that any of these causes becomes the only cause, but it sure can be a mix.

At which different points is any human individual, or society, not a 'Causal' force? People deny their own authority and accountability, quickly, when 'Blame' points the finger at them.

Well, again, those that do. Others fall for blame when they shouldn't. You've already acknowledged this, but I think it's good to keep that idea fresh.

Or consider the matters of Guilt and Shame. Are these not examples of a person blaming-oneself?

Yes. Though they are not working through the issue. Regret is when one has worked through. Guilt is this weird mixed half dead state. I am bad because I did X. You haven't resolved it. You haven't really forgiven yourself and noted that you've learned and you probably haven't forgiven the other person for noticed what an ass you were.

Can people be wrong? Can people lie? Can people take the blame for other people's crimes and failings?

3 yesses.

Causality is a creative process in its first imagining. Whenever any person, ever, considers sources for any cause, they have to make estimations, guess about and predict it. If somebody is throwing rocks or shooting arrows at you, you trace them back to their direction and guess its origin from there. This is a very complex mental process. Society sees it fit for 'experts' to source-out the causes in general. In Science, this is "Physics". In Society, this is Law and Judgment. Psychology studies behavioral causes and disruptions of mental health. But Philosophy, I believe, undermines all of these, and goes to any or every possible Source. Philosophy and Religion attempt to examine "First Cause", Origin, and Creation.

But ALL the True, Right, AND Correct ANSWERS regarding these three 'things' ARE ALREADY KNOWN, well at least by some of 'us' anyway.

By the way have you NOTICED your apparent CONTRADICTION here regarding your so-called 'Sources' and 'Causes'?

So the sourcing requires more thought, rationality, and reasoning, than the other studies and sciences.

[Age]

Well, everyone justifies their blame, except for very honest people who can say something like 'I hate you right now, because X happened, but I have idea if that's fair.' Or the political equivalent. But otherwise pretty much everyone, like you, has blame, actively blames and then justifies that blame. So, how does one know one is blaming fairly, not being confirmation-biased, not blaming for near unconscious reasons and looking for justifcation anywhere one can find it, not blaming for reasons other than the one one justifies the blame with, not blaming just one agent when there are others and so on?

IOW if one reads the OP one gets the impression there is a problem with blaming. But now it seems like blame is ok as long as you have good justification.

So Justice then implies an 'accurate' sense or system of Blaming—of correctly/rightly/justly attributing Causes to Sources.

I believe Self-Consciousness and Self-Awareness are required, a rare trait in humanity or life in general. A person needs to "see himself the outside", outside one's own perspective, or from the perspective of others. Empathy is required. Otherwise a person is simply stuck in their own Biases, prejudice, and with contempt. An attack on your opinion, is then an attack on your person directly. This is why most appeal to Emotional arguments and use logical fallacies: Irrationality. This happens because people, most people, are viscerally attached to their opinions and beliefs. "To be wrong", is a personal attack. This is why most people have little tolerance for being considered 'wrong', and cannot detach their personal emotion and investment from their own beliefs/opinions.

It means that many 'strong' beliefs are not reasonable and rational, but unreasonable and irrational.

It means that most beliefs are believed-in, because of the imagined or actual, perceived Benefits of those beliefs, an expectation of Reward for holding certain beliefs.

Blaming society is very general, blaming a faction in society less so, though certainly broader than blaming a person. But I have certainly gotten the impression you blame individual people on the Left, including saying they have no souls or morals.

When it comes to particularly atrocious or grievous crimes, yes, I believe some acts in life are Evil. Those who Cause children/boys to castrate themselves, or Ellen Page and other women to castrate her breasts...that's Evil. We may as well bring back Torture, if Western society and civilization has fallen this far. Evil has returned. I think the targeting of children is particularly heinous and crosses the line.

IOW, some Injustices must be violently rebuked.

Sure, car wrecks are good examples, especially if one wants to point out that blame can be spread out. Perhaps one driver was more at fault or so clearly did something wrong so on that level. But then I had a friend how went from engineer to emergency room doctor and he was outraged by how unsafe cars were made. Then we could blame a society that has facilitated the use of cars and not other forms of transportation. Then I'd need to get into the specifics of the case but police, drivers parents, the way the road laid out and maintained could all be brought to bear as potential causes. And not that any of these causes becomes the only cause, but it sure can be a mix.

At which different points is any human individual, or society, not a 'Causal' force? People deny their own authority and accountability, quickly, when 'Blame' points the finger at them.

Well, again, those that do. Others fall for blame when they shouldn't. You've already acknowledged this, but I think it's good to keep that idea fresh.

Or consider the matters of Guilt and Shame. Are these not examples of a person blaming-oneself?

Yes. Though they are not working through the issue. Regret is when one has worked through. Guilt is this weird mixed half dead state. I am bad because I did X. You haven't resolved it. You haven't really forgiven yourself and noted that you've learned and you probably haven't forgiven the other person for noticed what an ass you were.

Can people be wrong? Can people lie? Can people take the blame for other people's crimes and failings?

3 yesses.

Causality is a creative process in its first imagining. Whenever any person, ever, considers sources for any cause, they have to make estimations, guess about and predict it. If somebody is throwing rocks or shooting arrows at you, you trace them back to their direction and guess its origin from there. This is a very complex mental process. Society sees it fit for 'experts' to source-out the causes in general. In Science, this is "Physics". In Society, this is Law and Judgment. Psychology studies behavioral causes and disruptions of mental health. But Philosophy, I believe, undermines all of these, and goes to any or every possible Source. Philosophy and Religion attempt to examine "First Cause", Origin, and Creation.

But ALL the True, Right, AND Correct ANSWERS regarding these three 'things' ARE ALREADY KNOWN, well at least by some of 'us' anyway.

By the way have you NOTICED your apparent CONTRADICTION here regarding your so-called 'Sources' and 'Causes'?

So the sourcing requires more thought, rationality, and reasoning, than the other studies and sciences.

[Wizard22]

That certainly happens in philosophy but all the things you listed under psychology, Law, Justice, Physics...those are all topics in philosophy. Philosophy as a subject area does not have some unified position like: You cannot blame him you must determine if it was the Big Bang or God who set in motion a chain of dominoes. There is no such general philosophy position. Some philosopher may have that kind of position. I don't think Religion does this either, though some religions will tend more in that direction than you may like. I mean, many religions are clearly not against blaming and punishing individuals for their acts.

The commonality among Philosophy with regard to First Cause, is Doubt.

The antithesis is Blind Faith, Religion.

The synthesis is reasonable argument, examination of premises with regard to evidence (Reality), and falsifiability, Science.

[Wizard22]

BUT, you either have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE NOR IDEA as to WHY I capitalise some words, or, if you do KNOW, then WHY are you emphasizing some letters? What would be the actual purpose of emphasizing just some letters?

I don't really care why you capitalize some words and not others.

Stick to the OP and don't go off-topic.

[Age]

BUT, you either have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE NOR IDEA as to WHY I capitalise some words, or, if you do KNOW, then WHY are you emphasizing some letters? What would be the actual purpose of emphasizing just some letters?

I don't really care why you capitalize some words and not others.

LOL Here is a PRIME example of the ABSURDITY that some of 'these people, back in the days when this was being written, would GO TO, to 'TRY TO', DEFLECT.

'This one' ACTUALLY SAID that 'it' does some 'thing' for the SAME REASON I DO. BUT, when I POINT OUT the ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY and ABSURDITY of making such A CLAIM 'it' THEN 'TRIES TO' DEFLECT.

Stick to the OP and don't go off-topic.

LOL
LOL
LOL

As if 'you' HAD NOT. 'you' REALLY DO MAKE 'us' LAUGH here "wizard22".

[Age]

That certainly happens in philosophy but all the things you listed under psychology, Law, Justice, Physics...those are all topics in philosophy. Philosophy as a subject area does not have some unified position like: You cannot blame him you must determine if it was the Big Bang or God who set in motion a chain of dominoes. There is no such general philosophy position. Some philosopher may have that kind of position. I don't think Religion does this either, though some religions will tend more in that direction than you may like. I mean, many religions are clearly not against blaming and punishing individuals for their acts.

The commonality among Philosophy with regard to First Cause, is Doubt.

BUT, 'first cause', (starting with capital letters or not), IS ALREADY KNOWN. So, there IS NO 'doubt' to those of 'us' WITH THIS KNOWLEDGE.

The antithesis is Blind Faith, Religion.

With religions 'antithesis' being BELIEF that ALL 'things' in religion IS Wrong.

The synthesis is reasonable argument, examination of premises with regard to evidence (Reality), and falsifiability, Science.

This HAS ALREADY DONE, and WHY 'we' have ALREADY OBTAINED the IRREFUTABLE Truth. BUT, what can be CLEARLY SEEN here is ANOTHER PRIME example ASSUMPTION and BELIEF STOPPING 'these people', back then, INTO 'inquiring', 'questioning', 'challenging', 'examining', 'arguing', and just plain old simple LOOKING.

What can ALSO be CLEARLY SEEN here is that 'these ones' SOUGHT OUT and CONSIDERED 'evidence', INSTEAD OF JUST GOING STRAIGHT TO ACTUAL PROOF, ITSELF.

[Wizard22]

BUT, 'first cause', (starting with capital letters or not), IS ALREADY KNOWN.

No it's not

First Cause is a hypothesis of infinite regress by which all causes and effects have 'subsequent' causes all the way back to the hypothetical "beginning" of time.

[Age]

BUT, 'first cause', (starting with capital letters or not), IS ALREADY KNOWN.

No it's not

LOL

Here we have ANOTHER PRIME example of one BELIEVING that what they KNOW or do NOT KNOW also applies to absolutely EVERY one "ELSE".

First Cause is a hypothesis of infinite regress by which all causes and effects have 'subsequent' causes all the way back to the hypothetical "beginning" of time.

LOL

And here we have ANOTHER PRIME example of when one BELIEVES that 'its' OWN MISINTERPRETATION of 'things' is the ONLY WAY to LOOK AT and SEE 'things'.

CONTRARY to what 'you' BELIEVE here "wizard22" WHEN, and IF, 'you' ALSO COME-TO-KNOW WHAT the term and phrase 'first cause' MEANS and REFERS TO, EXACTLY, THEN ’you' WILL ALSO COME-TO-KNOW WHERE 'your' MISINTERPRETATION IS here, EXACTLY.

ALSO, and besides the Fact, that you are SO WAY OFF here, what is ALSO CLEARLY VISIBLE IS your ABSOLUTE LUDICROUS and RIDICULOUS CLAIM here. WHICH IS; the term 'infinite regress' ONLY goes back to SOME 'beginning'.

Did 'you' REALLY NOT SEE and NOTICE just how Truly ABSURD 'this CLAIM' of 'yours' IS here?

[Iwannaplato]

BUT, 'first cause', (starting with capital letters or not), IS ALREADY KNOWN.

No it's not

First Cause is a hypothesis of infinite regress by which all causes and effects have 'subsequent' causes all the way back to the hypothetical "beginning" of time.

It's generally God. But first cause is the beginning uncaused cause. So, not an infinite regress.

That's my position on what it means, not my position on what's been going on.

[Wizard22]

It's generally God. But first cause is the beginning uncaused cause. So, not an infinite regress.

That's my position on what it means, not my position on what's been going on.

It's as finite or infinite as the universe and time is. It implies the "Beginning of Everything". I disagree with the belief or implication that Existence does have a 'beginning'. I believe Existence is infinite, and so, no "First Cause". In fact, if origination of blame and cause are both subjective, and arbitrary, then any sophisticated mind has no relative source for a 'beginning' other than where the mind first identifies chains of causal sequences. This can "begin" with consciousness itself.

Mankind erroneously believes that because he became (self)-conscious, that so too must other things 'begin' from there—as-if perception and consciousness were Causal forces in addition to any other hypothetical causes.

To the Religious minds, First Cause is with God, Creationism, Genesis, instead of Mankind's conscious awareness or perception of existence. Cause is "beyond man".

[Age]

As can be CLEARLY SEEN, in the last two posts here, what IS ACTUAL True, is HERE. BUT, the people, back in those days were just NOT YET OPEN and Honest ENOUGH TO SEE 'It'.

[iambiguous]

When I think of Blame, Morality, Justice, Agency, I consider how most people blame "The Government" or "God" or "Power" or "Nature" or "Chance", anything and everything except blaming themselves... so consider this redirection. It's easy to blame everybody else for your misfortunes. It's very difficult to blame yourself. Because blaming yourself leads to depression, over-thinking, stagnation, immobility, paralyzation, guilt, stress, panic, disease, and worse, depending on the severity of the blamed action or event. Blaming yourself is just hard; it necessarily requires and imposes a strict Ethical system for yourself. Because if *YOU* are the Cause of your life's misfortunes, or other people's misfortunes, then a great deal of effort, foresight, and choice is required from then on out about what you Ought to do, and what you Will do, in face of these Moral Responsibilities.

It's easier just to shrug off all Blame, and point your finger elsewhere. Which is what 99.999% of humanity does, throughout life.

It's called "Confirmation Bias". It's called "Selective Reasoning". You point toward yourself, when somebody needs to take credit for The Good. You point toward everybody else, when somebody needs to take credit for The Bad or Evil. So this is a very simple equation. What kind of Man, would point toward Himself when it comes to taking the entire world's Evil, and none of the Good? Can you think of a Man who would do such a thing, who would represent such an inversion of common instinct, Morals and Ethics? I think you can...think of such a Man.

What's His name?

All of these Capital Letter words.

So, assuming that we do have Autonomy, let's agree on a particular set of circumstances. A context in which some here are likely to define and to deduce conflicting assessments of what these words ought to mean. Philosophically as it were.

Let's take those definitions and deductions down to Earth and note how "for all practical purposes" they are applicable when the time comes to, say, pass legislation in a community prescribing and proscribing actual sets of behaviors.

As most know here, I'm inclined to use abortion as the context. It literally revolves around life and death, almost everyone is familiar with it, and it generates some of the most explosive newspaper headlines.

So...

Mary aborts her unborn baby/clump of cells. What of Blame, Morality, Justice, Agency, Government, God, Power, Nature, Chance, Confirmation Bias, Selective Reasoning, Bad, Evil, Man, Morals, Ethics, His then?

Or choose another context.

Or, once again, am I missing the point about "Serious Philosophy" here too?

So what if a female human body, which goes by the name of "mary", aborts ANOTHER human body within that female body?

Was there even MEANT TO BE ANY 'right' OR 'wrong' here?

I'm never, ever really SURE what it is that Age POSTS here but again, in regard to those CAPITAL LETTER words above...

Let's take [the] definitions and deductions down to Earth and note how "for all practical purposes" they are applicable when the time comes to, say, pass legislation in a community prescribing and proscribing actual sets of behaviors.

Behaviors some embrace enthusiastically while others are utterly appalled by. Indicting Donald Trump for example. "Confirmation Bias" and "Selective Reasoning" here.

Or, philosophically, given human autonomy, is it possible to pin down the most reasonably Authoritative Frame Of Mind here?

[Age]

All of these Capital Letter words.

So, assuming that we do have Autonomy, let's agree on a particular set of circumstances. A context in which some here are likely to define and to deduce conflicting assessments of what these words ought to mean. Philosophically as it were.

Let's take those definitions and deductions down to Earth and note how "for all practical purposes" they are applicable when the time comes to, say, pass legislation in a community prescribing and proscribing actual sets of behaviors.

As most know here, I'm inclined to use abortion as the context. It literally revolves around life and death, almost everyone is familiar with it, and it generates some of the most explosive newspaper headlines.

So...

Mary aborts her unborn baby/clump of cells. What of Blame, Morality, Justice, Agency, Government, God, Power, Nature, Chance, Confirmation Bias, Selective Reasoning, Bad, Evil, Man, Morals, Ethics, His then?

Or choose another context.

Or, once again, am I missing the point about "Serious Philosophy" here too?

So what if a female human body, which goes by the name of "mary", aborts ANOTHER human body within that female body?

Was there even MEANT TO BE ANY 'right' OR 'wrong' here?

I'm never, ever really SURE what it is that Age POSTS here but again, in regard to those CAPITAL LETTER words above...

Let's take [the] definitions and deductions down to Earth and note how "for all practical purposes" they are applicable when the time comes to, say, pass legislation in a community prescribing and proscribing actual sets of behaviors.

Behaviors some embrace enthusiastically while others are utterly appalled by. Indicting Donald Trump for example. "Confirmation Bias" and "Selective Reasoning" here.

Or, philosophically, given human autonomy, is it possible to pin down the most reasonably Authoritative Frame Of Mind here?

Not that you would be EVER sure of what I am saying here now, but there IS A WAY TO 'pin down' the One and ONLY True, Right, Correct, and REASONABLE so-called 'Authoritative Frame Of Mind'. Which, by the way, IS, and WAS, UNCOVERED and FOUND IN the most SIMPLEST and EASIEST of ways.

Oh, and by the way, even FINDING OUT, FOR SURE, what 'it' IS, EXACTLY, which I post here can, ALSO, be UNCOVERED IN the most SIMPLEST and EASIEST of was, AS WELL.