| Author | Post |
|---|
JustifiedByFaith
Pioneer100© Member
Playing to a different drummer
| Joined: | |
| Location: | Pacific Northwest, USA |
| Posts: | 8620 |
| MyResume: | | | MyJob: | | | MyForum: | Politics & Religion | | MyLove: | Not of this world... | | MyWish: | | | MyFile: | [Download] | | MyIntro: | | | MySex: | Male |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| MyPOTD: |   |
|
Posted: 07:59 pm |
|
Brian wrote: JustifiedByFaith wrote: 24HourNut wrote: Brian wrote: I would ask you to consider, though, whether "going to talk to a woman" you're attracted to is a universal, genetically coded response, or merely a culturally-learned response. If it's culturally-learned, does that make a difference? I think it does.
It doesn't have to be genetically wired for that specific task in order to classify it is an "of course, inevitable" idea generator. I am not genetically coded to eat chicken but let's not give me credit for wanting to eat it when I am hungry! Culturally-learned to want to get to know a female in that case? No, of course not. The idea to have sex with, touch, talk to, get to know, etc. are all natural byproducts of being a social sexual creature with brains. Some things you don't have to be taught, which is why it is silly to hold someone responsible for the IDEA for some things.
I would ask YOU to consider if every normal heterosexual teenage boy/young man is going to have the idea to fool around with a girl. YES, you said, That's why they are not responsible for the idea. That idea is going to hit them regardless. For responsibility assigning, it's right up there with having the idea to drink when you are thirsty, dress warm when it is cold out, or to walk slow on ice.
Instinct, natural, totally unoriginal unthinking ideas born out of the type of species you are.
Brian wrote:
And if they're not responsible for wanting to talk to the woman, are they also not responsible for what they want to say?
Actions are different than ideas. You are not responsible for having a sexual apparatus and feeling attracted to others and wanting to do something about it - that is why attraction is involuntary. You don't have to come up with or have special conditioning to have the basic idea to get with them. What they feel they should say is a judgement call and yes they should be held responsible. Some ideas they should not be and some they should be, that is my point. Not held responsible for ALL ideas. Some are clearly involuntary or practically so.
So if someone was attracted say to "animals", would that be involuntary and appropriate because they feel that desire? If they seek to fullfull it therefore, should the fullfillment of the desire then not be held accountable because it was involuntary?
People are responsible for their actions. The mere fact that you feel a sexual desire doesn't mean you have to act on it. Frank and I were (mostly) talking about thoughts, though, not actions. The feeling of the sexual desire towards animals, while we might find it perverse, is not necessarily something a person is responsible for.
(And I really hope you're not trying to go where I think you're going with this. I'd prefer this forum not be tainted that way.)
Nope, I actually think I covered my point Brian. Carry on.
There's a saying. If you want someone to love you forever, buy a dog, feed it and keep it around.
Dick Dale
|
| | Ads appear if not logged in. |
|
Brian
Grand Poobah of Moderation
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4363 |
| MyResume: | | | MyJob: | | | MyForum: | | | MyLove: | | | MyWish: | | | MyFile: | | | MyIntro: | | | MySex: | |
| Status: |
Online
|
| MyPOTD: | |
|
Posted: 08:00 pm |
|
Britt wrote: Brian wrote: I'm not sure if thoughts just "are". There are certain thoughts that a person just wouldn't have, because of their nature. You can be relatively certain that the Pope never thought of gathering the College of Cardinals and having them all machine-gunned by goons. However harmless one's thoughts may be, however fleeting they are, as long as they're not involuntary (e.g., biological responses like hunger or arrousal) we're still responsible for them. Until someone proves that free will doesn't exist, that is...
Interesting perspective.... I certainly believe free will exists. Whether thoughts are worthy of blame? Not sure. For example, what if a survivor of combat finds himself thinking of an act he committed that would be punishable by death if it were not done during a time of war? Does he have free will to NOT think of this act, especially if he was brutally traumatized by the war?
I think a traumatized person, to the degree that they're unhealthy, can't choose not to think about what they've done. With counselling, though, they can get to that point. In such a case, I think the traumatized person doesn't have the requisite free will. In that case, the thoughts would not be voluntary, so the responsibility wouldn't apply.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last."
-- "A Long December", Counting Crows
|
Current time is 10:59 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 |
|
|
Themes and most mods done in collaboration with:
WowClassic - powerful forum software with the best support service.
We are partners with
Forum Owner Services
Powered by
WowBB 1.7 - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
