Do we have to answer for the actions of others just because we share an allegiance to a group? Can we show up just for the free coffee, or do we need to answer for the behavior of the other members? AUTHOR’S NOTE: 1. This video is a personal conversation on morality, not a formal logical argument. My intuition on this issue would not hold up in a real debate, but it guides my ethics and choices. I do not claim a privileged position to morality. 2. The key difference between complicity and non-complicity, as I discuss in the video, is the shared value system, and the actions of the members of the group in good standing. Being a willing part of the apartheid system, for example, even if you were not racist, would carry some level of personal responsibility. 3. “Working from within”, when that includes supporting the group with money and time regardless of the group’s goals, is not ethically viable. If you don’t see that, I’m afraid I can’t explain it to you. 4. I don’t believe there is only one level of complicity. Someone who gives $5 to a Catholic charity does not share the same responsibility as the Pope, but without donations, the continuing abuse and cover-up of past abuses would not have been possible. I wanted to spark a debate. Disagreeing with me on this issue will not hurt my feelings.
Guilt by Association
Previous post: Sex, Sports, and Caster Semenya
Next post: The Craft Movie [Pt. 10]
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
Very well said!
Impressive video
The question is… does your sense of morality on a specific issue. Overpower the effort it would take to detach yourself from said organization.
I think in most cases, people choose the easy road, because they feel as though the moral effect of their not choosing it, would be negligible.
Basically, I think most people justify complaisance by the minuteness of their potential actions.
The main problem with this argumentation is that it doesn’t account for involuntary association. For instance, if you believe in the holy word of the Quran, you can’t just stop being a Muslim, because certain Muslims are terrorists. Because the fact that certain Muslims are terrorists does not change the validity of the holy text, nor whether or not Allah exists, the two main components to being a Muslim.
I do agree with most of what this video says but I have things to comment on.
Say you’re in WWII Germany and you’re one of the makers of all the weapons the Nazi’s use. All you want is to make lots of money to feed your wife and kids, not to be affiliated with Hitler. But would you really quit that job because Hitler wishes you to create a nuclear bomb? I sure wouldn’t as it would make my entire family go hungry for years.
@C0nc0rdance
for instance, my friend’s choir singing mom; if she reported a priest who fucked a little girl, she is not guilty of anything, legally or morally speaking. one could probably make the case that she did her organization a noble service, thus making it morally stronger.
@C0nc0rdance
of course i would report him (if it was a minor crime, like petty theft or consuming drugs or pissing on the street while drunkenly singing hava nagila, well, i’m a hypocrite).
this is my opinion on the matter; the sole fact of being aware that crime has been or is being committed or being a part of some organization that has members guilty of some crime doesn’t constitute guilt by association. not reporting it does.
your baker analogy is somewhat unlucky for this reason.
@franzpolak
Good points. Suppose your friend just committed a crime (rape, just to make this easy). Would you shelter them from justice? Would you turn them in?
What about if your friend was the friend in the previous scenario. Repeat the distance… a friend of a friend of a friend is sheltering a rapist. At what point are you blameless for covering for the rape?
she denounces pedophile priests and the people protecting them because, in her mind, true christians don’t rape little kids (using the scotsman now would be futile since it’s not me making the claim). now, if she were a member of nambla, what would be different?
no true pedophile rapes little kids?
on the voluntary part, nobody chooses his family or his country of origin. the baker may have fed the nazis, but the choice between a bullet and making bread is no choice at all. maybe for martyrs
shaky ethics grounds indeed. i don’t think you make a valid distinction between voluntary and involuntary association. my friend’s mother is deeply religious. she enjoys spiritual music and sings in the church choir, she donates to various charities at the church and gives things to caritas. she isn’t without faults, but we would describe her as a good, charitable person. the fact that she’s a member of the catholic church is irrelevant. (continues…)
Be rational about this. Does your membership in said organization increase, decrease, or not affect in any way the amount of immorality going on. Then factor that in with the reward of staying in the organization or the risk of leaving it. Free coffee and doughnuts doesn’t endorse their organization, in fact it may cost them as you are using their resources
Also, don’t insult the Boy Scouts of America. They have done ALOT of good, and the only pedo leader I know of is in jail.
Ok, I feel I should stand up for the scouts here. Your statements about them are primarily valid of the American grouping, with those in other countries having a better track record. Many have more comfortable veiws on homosexuals, and have expelled people based on sex abuse.
3) As someone who thinks Christianity is ridiculous because children are born with sin for the actions of their ancestors why would you feel responsible for the actions of the US government before you were born?
4) Being part of a group is meaningless if it is a granfalloon. ( a group whose individual member’s association is meaningless, i.e race, hair color, nationality, gender, etc.) Granfalloons are nothing more than lines drawn around a group of people with no meaningful association.
2) No one is responsible for the actions of their government anymore than they are responsible for the actions of their parents. Being a member of the US citizenry has nothing to do with the actions of the US government. You are only responsible for those actions if you in some way support them. Black people aren’t responsible for the actions of other black people. Caucasians aren’t responsible for the actions of other white people. Individuals are responsible for themselves.
Some of your logic is extremely flawed.
1) You say that any attempt to show that not all Germans were responsible for the holocaust is equivocation to deny the responsibility we have for voluntary organizations we support. however, the Nazi government was not a voluntary organization. Were all Germans responsible for the holocaust while the Swedish get off the hook merely because of the accident of birth.
I wish everyone thinks like this
So first of we need to define group, from you logic it seems like your job is a group, your clubs etc are a group the company’s you buy from is a group.
Now my question is if company X buys from Company Y and company Y is unethical ( in your subjective few ) ?
do you there for come to the conclusion that company X is also unethical for supporting company Y:?
if this is true what if company Y buys from company X for supplying a service to company Y ?
P.s. Yes the question is loaded.
I should have said this a few months earlier but I heard the Boy Scouts of America do not allow atheists and agnostics.
you make very good points, that many people will leech off the donuts for his personal gain, and ignore pedophilia, as it’s not harming anybody he knows (and can hardly be his support that increases child rape).
it’s also true that Catholic Church explicitly says pedophilia isn’t a disqualifier (enough said), as for you moving to a better country, sadly there’s no easy option for you (and for that, you’re much forgiven)
I enjoied your video alot. I would just like to make a comment without trying to argue with anyone. I’m not Catholic (I’m a member of the Orthodox Church), however, even if I was Catholic, I can still believe in God and not support the Church. And in a way, I almost wish Catholic would stop attending Church a bit (but keep their faith) untill some of the problems are gone. I bet it would only take 3 weeks of low attendance for the Catholic Church to fix the issue.
unethical behavior is a part of life. you’d have to abandon society and live in a cave if you truly want to stop supporting unethical behavior.
Goes to community bulletin board, Spots ad that sounds interesting……….What the hell did a NAMBLA Bulletin say that sounded interesting.
@midplanewanderer The world is the same before and after, basically.
@midplanewanderer If you want an explanation for what you observe consider this: I predict that in the time before I die I will feel guilty if I do not act for the good of those after I die.
It is somewhat similar to the god question, if you go from theist believing in god to atheist it is not like the world changes from good to meaningless.
The very meaning you had when believing in god obviously wheren’t from him in the first place when you had it ergo meaning can exist without god.
I don’t know. I think the country things is a little diffrent. If we all just ran away from things we didn’t like, ran from problems of a country, then how would that be any better then those how are complacent. Should we not instead decry what we do not agree with, and support en masse, what we do, like rallys for gay right and against discrimination?
You must log in to post a comment.