Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8710121" data-attributes="member: 177">So, have you watched The Good Place?In that show, as part of an exploration of ethics, they note that there comes a point where the path between a choice, and the outcome of that choice, is too obscured, or becomes too convoluted, or too diluted for a person to follow, such that it is not reasonable or fair to attach the consequences to the choice.There's examples of this in animal training techniques that fail.&nbsp; If you have a dog, and it poops on the carpet, and you come home hours later, shout at the dog, rub your dog's nose in it and smack the dog with a rolled up newspaper, the dog WILL NOT associate the action of it pooping with the negative consequences it experiences hours later.&nbsp; The dog will learn to fear you, but won't get why you are angry with it - the causal link between action and consequence is lost in the intervening time.There is also the matter that one event being required for another to happen does not make the second caused by the first, or non-random.&nbsp; If I remain indoors, a tree branch cannot fall on my head.&nbsp; However, if a tree branch falls on my head, you don't scold me with, &quot;Well, you chose to go outside, so that's on you!*.&nbsp; This is borne out in our legal systems and assignment of responsibility.&nbsp; We have a special category for things classified as &quot;acts of God&quot;, responsibility for which cannot be attached to a person or their choices.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 8710121, member: 177"] So, have you watched [I]The Good Place[/I]? In that show, as part of an exploration of ethics, they note that there comes a point where the path between a choice, and the outcome of that choice, is too obscured, or becomes too convoluted, or too diluted for a person to follow, such that it is not reasonable or fair to attach the consequences to the choice. There's examples of this in animal training techniques that fail. If you have a dog, and it poops on the carpet, and you come home hours later, shout at the dog, rub your dog's nose in it and smack the dog with a rolled up newspaper, the dog [I]WILL NOT[/I] associate the action of it pooping with the negative consequences it experiences hours later. The dog will learn to fear you, but won't get why you are angry with it - the causal link between action and consequence is lost in the intervening time. There is also the matter that one event being required for another to happen does not make the second caused by the first, or non-random. If I remain indoors, a tree branch cannot fall on my head. However, if a tree branch falls on my head, you don't scold me with, "Well, you [I]chose[/I] to go outside, so that's on you!*. This is borne out in our legal systems and assignment of responsibility. We have a special category for things classified as "acts of God", responsibility for which cannot be attached to a person or their choices. [/QUOTE]

Verification