100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Wiccans - part 3 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
The word "responsibility" has several meanings that are quite different. 1) "dependable" as in "a responsible person. 2) "willing cause" as in "assume responsibility for making sure something happens as planned". 3) "duty", as in "it is the responsibility of the cook to ensure that the food is tasty." 4) "blame", as in "he is responsible for the accident". #2 and #3 are similar and could be confused. The difference is that with #2 the resulting actions are self-determined according to one’s own evaluation, whereas with #3 the resulting actions are pre-determined and require no evaluation or choice. So when discussing “responsibility for” a car accident, the only relevant definitions are #2 (willing cause) and #4 (blame). Now #4 (blame) is usually determined by something like “the last causative action that contributed to the condition”. The problems with that are twofold: 1) Determining what actions did and did not contribute to the state of affairs. Did your “willing cause” in being at that intersection contribute to the state of affairs? There can be no denying the fact that had you not been there, the state of affairs would not have included you being in the accident. 2) Assigning blame based on the “last causative, contributing action”. To me this is the biggest problem and the heart of the disagreement. The problem is that it ignores all contributing factors except one, when it is obvious that there are many, many contributing factors. And even if you don’t accept that definition, any definition of “blame” is based on the principle that some actions contributed to the condition and some did not. And the problem is the same. It boils down to what actions you choose to assign as having contributed to the state of affairs. It seems that Jeannie’s argument is (and correct me if I’m wrong here Jeannie) that both your actions and the other person’s actions, contributed equally to the state of affairs. The only real difference is that your actions are acceptable to the majority, whereas the drunken driver’s are not. So it would seem that “blame” is really a matter of majority rule, which seems to be borne out by simple observation of our society. Thus, the “blame” viewpoint of responsibility is almost the exact opposite of the “willing cause” viewpoint of responsibility. Blame is essentially an other-determined assignment of having done wrong, whereas “willing cause” is a self-determined decision to do right. It is unfortunate that the latter can lead to the former through the capriciousness of our majority rule system. (Wow! That was more of a rant than I intended to go off on.  )
That sounds fishy to me 
If I go to work, minding my own business, and get run over by a drunk driver, the majority could rule that I'm to blame? Just like that? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<<<======
Abra said: My argument is based on the following:
Empowerment = Responsibility. I assume that by "empowerment" you mean something to the effect of "having the ability to affect the course of events". If so, then you must admit that both parties had the ability to affect the course of events up until an instant before the impact. And in fact, if we accept the idea that drunk drivers are physically impaired, the drunk driver would actually have less ability to affect the course of events than the sober driver! (I am soooooo bad!  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think that JB has as much right to her beliefs as I or anyone else here does. Tho I don't agree with them, she doesn't agree with mine. I'm cool with that
Why do we have to keep going out of our way to try and prove she's wrong? It still comes down to a belief. She feels that's it's fact for her. Yes, just like the most of the Christians I've spoken to that tell me the bible is fact, this is the way it is, end of story. There's no arguing it... My point is if we keep trying to prove and disprove this concept than we're no different than the "general religion" people. Pick and God, Goddess, or being you want, they'll all agree we don't need to go back to the general religion population 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Mon 12/08/08 12:56 PM
|
|
<<<======
Abra said: My argument is based on the following:
Empowerment = Responsibility. I assume that by "empowerment" you mean something to the effect of "having the ability to affect the course of events". If so, then you must admit that both parties had the ability to affect the course of events up until an instant before the impact. And in fact, if we accept the idea that drunk drivers are physically impaired, the drunk driver would actually have less ability to affect the course of events than the sober driver! (I am soooooo bad! )
Yeah that just wont work logically speaking. Free will does not automatically become synonymous with blame. When I drive a car I understand that driving a car might lead to accidents. There is always the potential for that to happen when operating a 3000+ lb motor vehicle that is hurtling through space at upwards of 80 MPH. If an injury collision were to occur that might be my fault or it might not. You cant rightfully say that I take on some of that liability simply by being on the road. Unless you are just taking some sort of metaphysical approach and choosing to overlook the proper designation of liability altogether. Im taking the real world approach here. People wont buy this concept unless you are quite capable of demonstrating its mundane applicability to their daily lives. My question was never addressed. If I was the sole survivor of a plane crash, am I to blame for that circumstance arising? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The word "responsibility" has several meanings that are quite different. 1) "dependable" as in "a responsible person. 2) "willing cause" as in "assume responsibility for making sure something happens as planned". 3) "duty", as in "it is the responsibility of the cook to ensure that the food is tasty." 4) "blame", as in "he is responsible for the accident". Regardless of how you define it, I still hold that a person can only be responsible for what they have control over. Empowerment, and Responsibility are directly related. You can't be responsible for what you are powerless to control. No matter how you define responsiblility. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds fishy to me Considering some of the more bizarre antics of our legal system, with enough money, one could very likely get just such a judgement.
If I go to work, minding my own business, and get run over by a drunk driver, the majority could rule that I'm to blame? Just like that? Just remember that the very foundation of democracy is that the majority is right by definition. And yes, that concept is very fishy! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And in fact, if we accept the idea that drunk drivers are physically impaired, the drunk driver would actually have less ability to affect the course of events than the sober driver! (I am soooooo bad! )
Yes, but the drunk driver did have the choice to drink or not drink. So he chose to get drunk. You can hardly choose to drink alcohol and then claim that you didn't choose to get drunk.
Unless of course, you were truly ignorant to the affects of alcohol. But that's highly unlikely in the case of a drunk driver. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering some of the more bizarre antics of our legal system, with enough money, one could very likely get just such a judgement. Just remember that the very foundation of democracy is that the majority is right by definition. And yes, that concept is very fishy! I sure hope that the system here in Ireland works properly then. I know that in the States these things could very well happen, considering the law suits I've seen carried out there. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think that JB has as much right to her beliefs as I or anyone else here does. I'm in total agreement with you there Jill. I'm not trying to change JB's beliefs. But she said to me a few pages back,... JB wrote:
What you are not comfortable with is taking 100% responsibility for your personal reality. You are looking at it from the point of the ego and the little self, and not the higher self. You do not realize that you agreed to experience this life before you came... what ever it involved unknown to you or not. 100% responsiblity for my personal reality? My claim is that I don't have 100% control over my reality, and therefore I cannot be 100% responsible for it. I mean, Jeanniebean is more than welcome to believe whatever she wants to believe. But to accuse me of not being comfortable with taking 100% responsibility for my reality requires the assumption that I have 100% control over it. My argument is that I don't have 100% control over my reality. I wish I did! If I did, then I'd be glad to take 100% responsiblity for it. Until that happens, I can't can't be 100% responsible for what I don't have 100% control over. That's my only point. And I personally think that it's as valid as a Peppermint Patty! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They are attempting to assess blame where there should be no blame assessed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If Glory Jean believes that she has 100% control over her life, then her philosophy is true for her.
I just don't feel like I have 100% control over my life, and therefore I cannot be 100% responsible for it. Maybe that will change in the future. Maye I will learn to gain 100% control over my life through the magic of witchcraft. If I do, then I will also accept 100% responsiblity for it. I'm just not there yet. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If Glory Jean believes that she has 100% control over her life, then her philosophy is true for her. I just don't feel like I have 100% control over my life, and therefore I cannot be 100% responsible for it. Maybe that will change in the future. Maye I will learn to gain 100% control over my life through the magic of witchcraft. If I do, then I will also accept 100% responsiblity for it. I'm just not there yet.
I can not believe that it is possible, there are too many imponderables involved. Since you only have control over yourself, and not over others, you just can't know what will happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(I don't know why this is so hard to understand or believe.) But total freedom and total responsibility is not an easy thing. It begins with accepting responsibility.. not for the entire state of the world.... but for your own life experiences. jb It's hard to understand because of the following: We don't appear to have Total Freedom But you seem to be assuming that we do. I would be the first to agree with you that Total Freedom = Totally Responsiblity. My argument is that we don't appear to have Total Freedom. We are restricted in the choices and power that we have. At least I certainly am. I don't know about the rest of you. 
Of course you don't have total freedom. The reason you don't is because you don't to take total responsibility for everything. (The entire state of the universe) I am only suggesting that if people will accept total (or just more) responsibility for their personal experiences then they will move towards being more 'free.' You cannot have freedom if you will not accept responsibility even for your own life experiences. Freedom comes to the degree that we empower ourselves by accepting more responsibility. You don't have to believe this. I "preach" it as my personal truth because I have personal experience that has convinced me that it is true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am only suggesting that if people will accept total (or just more) responsibility for their personal experiences then they will move towards being more 'free.'
What is the difference between this and "actions have consequences"? You are attempting to re-invent the wheel. If thats all you are trying to convey, then no argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 12/08/08 01:36 PM
|
|
Regardless of how you define it, I still hold that a person can only be responsible for what they have control over. Empowerment, and Responsibility are directly related. You can't be responsible for what you are powerless to control. No matter how you define responsiblility. Totally agree Abra. I have been employed in jobs where I was held responsible for things that happened that I had never been given any authority over. That is a very frustrating experience and a good reason to always have a clear job description when you go to work for someone about what exactly you are responsible for and what your are not. If this is not clear to you and your employer, problems will arise. I have had to tell my employer that if I am to be held responsible for this or that, then I MUST have authority to regulate everything that concerns that area. This is why people don't believe that they are responsible for their life experiences because they believe they have no control over them. The only reason they do not have control over them is because they do not understand the law of attraction. That is why I 'preach' and study and practice the law of attraction because it gives me more control over my actual life experiences. Is it a belief or a law? I believe it is a law. It is a law I believe exists like the law of cause and effect or the law of Karma. I talk about not to convert people to my particular belief, but only for people who would like to know more about how this law works. As I have said before, we either manifest our personal reality or we do not. I don't see how there can be any exceptions to that rule. There are more causes that you can imagine in the making of any event. Whether or not that event is part of your personal reality is up to your decisions and awareness. You have a higher mind that knows more than you do and if you listen to it, it will tell you what is going on. This is sometimes called "second sight" but it is a natural state of awareness that can be tapped into. Learn to do this and you can avoid that intersection where an accident is about to happen. This is how you have more control over your personal experiences. jb |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can not believe that it is possible, there are too many imponderables involved. Since you only have control over yourself, and not over others, you just can't know what will happen. Well, there is a possibility that exists. Divination! Hey, witches believe in divination! They use tarot cards, they use runes, they use scrying and crystal balls. If a person knows how to use diviniation and can actually use it dependable,... then,... and only then,... they could accept responsiblity for what happens to them. They would be in a position to avoid things. Supposedly, a witch that's on the ball (the crystal ball ) and worked at the World Trade Centers, would have known not to go to work that day because they would have had bad vibes or bad divination about going to work that day.
So, yes, if all of the claims of witchcraft are true and divination is a skill that can indeed be learned and used with dependablity. (i.e. Divination is Real) Then a witch who knows how to use diviniation is responsible for paying attention to it. However, I still hold that people who do not know how to use divination could not be held responsible for knowledge of where they should be. Knowledge = Empowerment = Responsibility If Witchcraft is TRUE, and I eventually become empowered via witchcraft, then my responsiblity will increase accordingly. In fact, this is precisely what Penczak states. With Empowerment comes Responsiblity. I'm all for that one! But at this present time I am not yet fully empowered. Perhaps as I continue to learn witchcraft I will become more empowered. Then I can accept more responsibility. But I think it would still be wrong to point to unempowered people and claim that they are 100% responsible for their personal reality. If they are not yet fully empowered, then they can't be fully responsible. That's my only argument. I'm just trying to point out that empowerment and responsiblity are intimately entwined. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If Glory Jean believes that she has 100% control over her life, then her philosophy is true for her. I just don't feel like I have 100% control over my life, and therefore I cannot be 100% responsible for it. Maybe that will change in the future. Maye I will learn to gain 100% control over my life through the magic of witchcraft. If I do, then I will also accept 100% responsiblity for it. I'm just not there yet.
Abra shame on you. I do not believe that I have 100% control over my life. I believe it is possible to gain 100% control over my personal experiences but I am not there yet. I am just learning. But even if I do not quite have 100% control I do accept 100% responsibility for everything that happen to me because I know that I had a part in creating it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have a higher mind that knows more than you do and if you listen to it, it will tell you what is going on. This is sometimes called "second sight" but it is a natural state of awareness that can be tapped into. Learn to do this and you can avoid that intersection where an accident is about to happen. This is how you have more control over your personal experiences. jb Well I agree with you on this JB. And I'm working on learning to gain a better communication with my higher self. There may even be truth to the fact that I have always been guided by my higher self. As I have stated before. I'm not complaining about life. I have it knocked.
So I may be following the advice of my higher self far more than I realize. I mean, I may not know how to use divination, but I have become a hermit. Not going places keeps me from being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Becoming a hermit removes the need for divination.
But now I want to learn divination. So I can go out without being paranoid. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am only suggesting that if people will accept total (or just more) responsibility for their personal experiences then they will move towards being more 'free.'
What is the difference between this and "actions have consequences"? You are attempting to re-invent the wheel. If thats all you are trying to convey, then no argument. I don't think I am trying to re-invent anything. What I am trying to convey is that a journey into more personal power starts with accepting responsibility for your current state of affairs and for your personal experiences. If you have blamed people in the past for your state of affairs, or blamed your parents for how messed up you are, or blamed society for not having a job, or any kind of blame of others, and if you believe that you have no power to effect your life, then you make that your reality. You make yourself a victim with no power. So to get out of the victim consciousness, you can begin by accepting more responsibility for your situation and your life experiences. You can learn from your mistakes instead of just looking for someone to blame. jb |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra shame on you. I do not believe that I have 100% control over my life. I believe it is possible to gain 100% control over my personal experiences but I am not there yet. I am just learning. But even if I do not quite have 100% control I do accept 100% responsibility for everything that happen to me because I know that I had a part in creating it. I just think you need to change your evangelistic approach.
Instead of preaching to people that they are uncomfortable with taking 100% responsiblity for their lives, you should preach to them that they can't indeed gain more control over thier lives if they would just wise up and become a Witch.
Or a Gypsy. Or a "Law of Attractionist" Or learn how to pray properly.
You just need lessons on how to become a better evangelist for the Law of Attraction. That's all. 
|
|
|
|
|
