Moral Responsibility

[balon!]

A thought experiment passed on from a friend:

]
Individuals who knowledgeably and consensually associate or enter into membership with a group are morally accountable for the group's actions. Yes or no?

This is the best wording I could come up with in the moment for the resolution. Background info, though:

This came up in a discussion about Fox news. Someone said something to the effect of "Everyone who runs that company and who works for it are evil." The debate that ensued was set off by the analogy, "If you join the Nazi party, you should be held responsible for their actions." That theory was rejected, but not on logical terms.

Basically, it should have been a much more intelligent discussion and I've been aching for one of those on this subject, to help it make more sense to me.

Thoughts, anyone?

[Cameraman Jenn]

That's a tough question Balon. I believe that people are responsible for the actions of a group that they consent to belong to provided the actions in question were agreed upon by the group as a whole and not just the leaders or rogue individuals within the group.

[Fist and Faith]

On a purely practical level - If you don't want to be held responsible for a group's actions, don't hang around with them.

On a moral level, I guess it depends on the situation. Not every Nazi did terrible things. I don't know if they all even knew that such things were happening.

Same goes for Catholic priests.

[Cameraman Jenn]

Good examples Fist.

[rusmeister]

Same goes for Catholic priests.

And teachers in public schools.

[stonemaybe]

Simply belonging to a group empowers the group. Why do you think most charities no longer have flag days collecting money? They instead try to get people to sign up to regular direct debits. They'll get less money because not as many people will donate, but because they have 'members' they can lobby more powerfully.

Anyway, if a group does wrong, who else is morally accountable except for the members of the group? That includes you, whether you were directly involved in the wrong or not. Your very membership may have spurred the group to think along the lines of 'we're powerful, we can do this'.

imo

[Auleliel]

I think you're only morally responsible for the actions of a group if you know about the action ahead of time (or can reasonably predict it, especially based on the values held collectively by the group) and do nothing to attempt to prevent or circumvent the action (or if this is not possible, at least warn the people who will be affected by the action). However, I think that if a person finds out about such an action of the group after the fact and does not either leave the group or somehow voice disapproval of that action, then the person is also morally responsible. In both cases the moral responsibility is for what could be termed a sin of omission rather than a sin of commission (at least, those are the terms we used in my religion classes in high school).

[Fist and Faith]

Good job, Auleliel.

[Cybrweez]

Are we talking group, or label? I'm not sure there's a difference, but maybe? I know in the tank, there's big discussion on what a conservative is, which would be a label. But then there's the Republican Party, which you could belong to. I guess in some cases, its kind of a blur, like fist said about the Nazi Party. Maybe Nazi Party had some grand ideals, which you agreed w/, but Hitler implemented them in crazy ways, which you didn't like. So, are you a Nazi? You'd probably just say that Hitler wasn't.

[Avatar]

Depends on the group?

--A

[balon!]

EDIT: Disclaimer: This is Claire, my ladyfriend in this thread. I wont be posting.

~Balon!

Are we talking group, or label? I'm not sure there's a difference, but maybe? I know in the tank, there's big discussion on what a conservative is, which would be a label. But then there's the Republican Party, which you could belong to. I guess in some cases, its kind of a blur, like fist said about the Nazi Party. Maybe Nazi Party had some grand ideals, which you agreed w/, but Hitler implemented them in crazy ways, which you didn't like. So, are you a Nazi? You'd probably just say that Hitler wasn't.

Group, definitely. I was referring to organizations and such. The Republican Party, for instance... although political parties in the United States are so broad and so many people belong to them but are not remotely active that I'm not sure if that particular example is applicable.

[balon!]

Simply belonging to a group empowers the group. Why do you think most charities no longer have flag days collecting money? They instead try to get people to sign up to regular direct debits. They'll get less money because not as many people will donate, but because they have 'members' they can lobby more powerfully.

Anyway, if a group does wrong, who else is morally accountable except for the members of the group? That includes you, whether you were directly involved in the wrong or not. Your very membership may have spurred the group to think along the lines of 'we're powerful, we can do this'.

imo

I think this nails it for me. I've tried to articulate it a dozen different ways and this comes closest, for sure. "Who else is morally accountable except for the members of the group... Your very membership may have spurred the group to think along the lines of 'we're powerful, we can do this.'" So just be careful who you sign up with, you know?

Oh, this isn't Balon, by the way, it's his girlfriend.

So don't hold him morally responsible for my statements.

[aliantha]

Hey Claire, if you get your own login, nobody here would hold you morally responsible for what goes on in the Tank. Or the Close. Just sayin'.

I can see a situation where someone could join a group that seemed innocent on its face -- but then the group turns its mission into something the person believes is wrong. Or the deeper the inductee goes into the group's workings, he/she realizes it's not what it was initially portrayed to be.

At that point, I would agree with Auleliel -- either speak up and work to end the evil, or get out.

[Fist and Faith]

What?? Balon has a girlfriend?? Sheesh, I gotta pay more attention...

[stonemaybe]

What?? Balon has a girlfriend?? Sheesh, I gotta pay more attention...

She's obviously the brains behind the outfit too....

And kind of combining the thread and your comment - if Balon gets into trouble for a post can he now claim that it was actually Claire not him and get off free???? Or is he responsible for Claire's posts no matter what she posts?

[wayfriend]

Groups don't do things. People do things.

And people are held responsible for what they do.

That being said, things that people do include enabling, supporting, promoting, aiding, and abetting things that other people do. And that entails responsibility as well.

[Auleliel]

Good post, wayfriend.

[Avatar]

Or is he responsible for Claire's posts no matter what she posts?

Yes he is. Unless he can prove to our satisfaction that she compromised his account.

Anyway, I'm not sure that people can be absolved of responsibility if their group does something. Now, it's not the same as if they actually carried out the particular act, but they're not free of blame either, by virtue of their support.

--A

[balon!]

[balon!]
I plead the fifth!
[/balon!]

[deer of the dawn]

Oh, this isn't Balon, by the way, it's his girlfriend.

So don't hold him morally responsible for my statements. Very Happy

Do the two of you consist a group, or a label?

There is a difference between responsibility and accountability. For example, the members of the Clave were not responsible for the Sunbane, but they were accountable for their response.