Are people responsible for what happens to them? Watch

jlopo
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
Do you think that people a responsible for their own misfortunes? I'd like to rpesent 3 diffrent scenarios



Scenario A: A man is at a party. He decides to get drunk. He willingly drinks until he passes out. He is robbed of his wallet and phone while he is passed out.


Scenario B: A rich man creates a profile on a dating site. on it he brags about how money he makes. He receives a messages from woman wishing to enter a relationship with him. he meets the woman and dates her for several weeks. One day he discovers that all his credit cards have been maxed out nad some . As it turns out the woman was a gold-digger who ran up his credit cards and stole money from him.


Scenario C) A man goes around being a manwhore. He lies to women to get in their panties. He eventually decides to seek out a weak passive virgin girl for a wife. He lies and tells her that he is a virgin too. He marries her. He treats like a doormat He decides to on her with the local ****s. The woman eventually finds out that the man had been cheating on her and was lying to her. She gets so angry at this news she stabs him to death (or Lorena Bobbits him if you prefer).



1) Do you think that the victims in my 3 scenarios are at fault/responsible for what happened to them?

2) do you have sympathy for any of them?
0
reply
ZakiTheTory
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
I think all three of the people are to blame themselves, as they put themselves into vulnerable situations- they took no caution.

I have no sympathy for any of these characters, however I do think the response in scenario 3 is a slight overreaction.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
yes, unless the misfortune is the direct act of somebody else
1) - he is not responsible for the fact that somebody stole from him, even though he made the theft consequenceless - the act of theft was instigated by somebody else, not the drunk. so the other actor is guilty of theft, but the drunk still acted in a way which could reasonably be said to lead to a higher outcome of his wallet being stolen - the guilt, of the other person is still existent and *they* are responsible no matter how easy a person makes theft against them. it's the thief's choice to steal.
2) if he actively allowed a person to use his credit cards without checking, each time, how much they spend, then that's the owner of the credit card's fault. he is responsible if he chooses to trust them unreasonably. it isn't illegal to use a person's credit cards if the owner allowed them to.
3) she is under no obligation to murder somebody just because she is angry, or else this would mean that most lunatic murderers are innocent. the woman killed not out of necessity like self-defence but merely for her own selfish imposing anger, so she is responsible because the result flowed directly from her conscious decision in the face of options, such as "not to kill him".
0
reply
Asolare
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
No, they may have in some way made themselves more vulnerable, but they do not control the acts of the other people and are not responsible for what actions other people take.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (135)
18.12%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (76)
10.2%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (128)
17.18%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (106)
14.23%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (74)
9.93%
How can I be the best version of myself? (226)
30.34%

Watched Threads

View All