all "salesmen" are full of bull, sales is the art of bull---T, and people that can sell things they themselves don't even believe in - are concidered the best among their peers. Trudeau is a lightweight compared to the bush administration and all his cronies, Govmnt - holds the golden title of salespeople of the century.

Its not just the government. It is the media. The propaganda in the media (controlled mostly by the world banking system and rich zionists.) They are the salesmen.

"con"-spiricies are just that i agree,the media plays a major roll in dishing out a one sided and off track reporting of what the truth is - i find it intersting that many movies that come out are usually followed by real life incedent's - who do you thinks behind that scenario and why?

You missed the point. Here is another, hopefully it will be grasped a little better.

Every choice made by an individual within our civilized society affects not only that individual, but others as well. So your choice could affect others, just like theirs could affect you. Whose value judgement wins out when there is a disagreement upon which choice would be best for the society, how would that "value" be measured?

Do you have an accurate understanding regarding the inherent complex nature of our government?




There is a seive.

For one, in order to be willing to accept the consequences, those consequences must be understood by the perpetrator prior to the action taken.

Also if one follows your logic, then a perpetrator who is not "willing to accept the consequences" for his/her actions should not be held accountable?

If they are not "willing" to accept responsibility, then who should decide that level of responsibility that ought to be attributed to such a perpetrator?




Evil???

Shining an objective light upon the true nature of why humans choose as we do could do nothing but improve our knowledge of ourselves, while simultaneously removing the long-believed religious misdiagnosis which has blinded our ability to understand the real reason(s) for our choices.

Evil???

What then is evil? Knowing the truth about actuality, or believing in something that does not exist?

My brother is a unique individual. I love him, so does my mother, but he is hard to help sometimes, but it is our responsibility to do so, we are his only family, his only friends.

My brother is dyslectic which is the least of his problems. He is troubled with bouts of depression, he has chronic health issues, he is mildly retarded, and he reads at a third grade level. He has trouble understanding people and gets mad at things that do not upset “normal” or “average” people.

He can read a label and get an entire different meaning from a warning label. Sadly he is not responsible for himself in the way that you probably are Sky. He has been in jail at least 5 times in 2 years over stupid things, traffic tickets, trespassing when he was really just lost, authority expect him to be responsible because he doesn't look retarded, he is smart in certain ways, and certainly is a smart mouth when it comes to anything that upsets him. HE can take apart something and put it back together, but he cannot stay out of trouble and spends his money on any wizz bang anything that looks cool or anyone says they think does anything at all . . . .

My mother is not always going to be there for him, and I try but I cannot watch him all day every day (or even would he let us) and not give up everything in my life, education, school. He responsible enough to work, make money, vote, but not take proper care of himself, or navigate anything that requires simple logic.

I don’t have any easy answers, I don’t take a stance on how much or how little responsibility the government has for Nick despite whatever JB thinks she has read into my questions . . . . I don’t know is the best answer I have, but I do not think its fair that people try to con him. That he spends money on things that don’t work, or has to call me every time he needs to know something. It doesn’t bother me when he actually calls, it bothers me when someone gives him the confidence to buy something because they think what they are selling is best for him regardless of the truth.

Sky, what toxins are cleaned out exclusively by peanut oil? You made this assertion, I am just curious. JB I made no assertion about the capabilities of any particular medication, I have no desire to prove anything to you, if you make assertions I will ask questions, sometimes just to see if you know what you are talking about, sometimes because I am interested, not always because I want to highlight the opposing view.

It really is simple courtesy to NOT make assumptions, but to instead ask questions if you feel I am taking a stance . . . simply ask em, If I appear to do the same just let me know. That would be appreciated. Perhaps that is one reason I ask so many questions . . .

Creative wrote:



Not true at all. Nobody can know the future or all of the possible consequences of any action. You can only guess or try to imagine them, but you can never know or understand them. This being true, you can still agree to accept the consequences NO MATTER WHAT THEY ARE. You do not know them, but you can accept that there will be consequences and you can be willing to take responsibility for them.

People who do not accept responsibility for their actions are people who will always blame everything on someone else. They will always say "Its not my fault! I didn't know this would happen... blah blah blah."

It does not matter if you knew or not. You accept responsibility.




Everyone is to be held accountable. If you don't accept the consequences the only thing you will do is cry and whine that it was not your fault and blame it on someone else. If you "are not willing" to accept the consequences" you will endure them anyway, but you will blame others.



If you kill someone and blame it on the fact that you were drunk or crazy or insane and you claim innocence, then the courts will decide and you will bare the consequence of their decision.

You can go through the rest of your life blaming others for your predicament but it will not help you in your life to do that. People who tend to blame others don't understand the law of attraction and they tend to always run from responsibility for their lives. They are always victims and they portray themselves as victims.

I believe it is you who missed the point. “Value” can only be measured by each individual according to their own goals. This nebulous “society” thing you speak of is nothing if not a collection of agreements about goals. Where there is no agreement, there is no “society”. And the agreements are about goals – goals that each individual in that society agrees to. If they do not agree with those goals, they are not part of that society. It is the agreement to the common goals that makes them part of a society.

So the answer to your question is: the value would be measured by the number of individuals who agreed that it was valuable.

But ultimately it always boils down to the individual and his personal goals.


Well maybe you do, but I don’t. I can accept the consequences of an action without knowing what all the consequences will be beforehand.


Not so. Responsibility, as I defined it, is a personal choice. It has nothing to do with any other person.

Don’t confuse responsibility with accountability. Responsibility is a choice originating from self. Accountability is an expectation originating from another.

Those who would “hold another accountable” have their own responsibility issues. i.e. are they willing to accept the consequences of their action of holding another accountable?


Again, one cannot “assign responsibility” as I defined it.

However, one can assign blame, which appears to be what you are talking about. And the answer to that has been covered above regarding “value”.


I would agree with that. But I do not see anything objective about stating an opinion as fact and calling the opposing opinion a “fallacy”.


And again, I appreciate that you have an opinion in the matter and that you have every right to that opinion. But regardless of your rhetoric, I still don’t happen to hold the same opinion.


Well if we’re only going for maximum rhetorical impact, then I’d say that there is something even more evil than both: not believing in something that does exist.

I don't think anyone can ever know "the real reasons" behind people's choices. There are way too many variables.

If a person wants to take the spiritual nature out of human existence that is their personal choice but I choose to believe differently and I have personal experiences that weigh heavy in my making of that choice.

Some people are so totally inside of their heads that they think everything can be reasoned out. It is as if they have no heart and no feeling at all. They analyze everything to death. Love, feeling, God, spirit, do not compute.

But humans are not only thinking creatures with minds and brains, they are very much feeling creatures who are capable of compassion and love and decisions that do not line up with reason and logic and circumstance. That is when the true conscious will of the person makes an important choice... which could go against all of his or her programing.

That is the will at work, and it is the spirit in charge, not the brain or the person. It (spirit) is the true self in my opinion.



You cannot know the truth about actuality because we as humans are not capable of seeing it. Our perceptions are limited.

As for "believing in something that does not exist," if a person thought it did not exist they probably would not believe in it, therefore you are merely expressing some sort of opinion here concerning about what some one else believes that you believe does not exist. I'll not venture to guess what you are talking about.

JB

Not true at all. Nobody can know the future or all of the possible consequences of any action

tribo

tell that to bruce mesquita. -

Just to clarify, I said “peanut oil can help in detoxifying” not “toxins are cleaned out exclusively by peanut oil”. My understanding is that some toxins can enter the fat cells and stay lodged there until the fat cell breaks down (e.g. to provide energy for the body.) Thus, ridding the body of those toxins requires breaking down the fat cells. This can be done through exercise. However, the body naturally tends to conserve its stored energy. What the peanut oil (or any useable oil) does is to provide replacement oils for the body to make into new fat cells thus allowing the body to maintain a balance of “oils out – oils in”.

So it is not that peanut oil exclusively cleans out toxins, it is simply that peanut oil can be used in the process of balanced detoxification.

So any claim that peanut oil detoxifies is bogus, and that exercise is what actually does the detox, and the oil replaces fat, gotcha . . . So peanut oil was not a good example after all given that it is not what does the detox. . . hmm, unless of course you can find some marketing that states it, then maybe they are just wrong, and someone needs to get them to be more honest . . . . hmm. I wonder who's responsible . . . hmm. I wonder who should straighten them out . . . hmm

I think what is missed in this conversation is the layers of responsibility that any society must have for it to function at all. I think this is missed because each time we enter a conversation here tween the four of us, it gets very general very quickly, we loose any kind of specificity, and the conversation turns to our philosophical difference instead.

What I mean by layers of responsibility is this . . . when you go to the doctor and seek his help he becomes responsible for the advice and medications if any he provides for you. Who is there to ensure he takes his responsibility seriously, I mean if you could then you would have the knowledge needed to diagnose yourself . . .

What happens when he does give bad advice, or willfully harms you? Who is there to make an example of him, and possibly ensure reimbursement for the harm caused. Who is there to try to make it right?

How can any society work without this?

Billy...

It seems to me that you have understood the underlying reasoning behind the notion of responsibility. The onion has many layers indeed. There are those who are capable of being responsible for themselves and their daily life choices, and there are those who are not. For those who do not understand the implications of any given choice, whether by lack of capability to understand or by lack of knowledge, someone else must make those choices for that individual.

In order for one to be willing to be responsible(hold themself accountable) s/he must be capable of knowing and recognizing that there will be consequences to their actions prior to the action being taken.

That is the reason that we do not convict young children or the mentally challenged based upon what society would normally deem an act of crime.

It has been said that the only reason children do not kill one another is because we do not give them guns and knives...

[Just so we don’t get off track here, I am still operating from this definition: responsibility = willingness to accept the consequences of one’s actions. Also: accountability = assigned duty to deal with (fix, correct, handle) a situation]


In the example, there were two critical decisions made
1) The doctor chose to give you advice.
2) You chose to take his advice.

Now what I hear you saying is that the only reason accountability is not divided 50/50 is that the doctor is supposed to have more knowledge than you. Not that he does but only that he is supposed to.

Is that correct?

Why would you go to anyone for help if you had as much knowledge as them? We are in a society of specializations.

I am responsible everyday for the customers who call in for my help (which I can guarantee that they do not know as much as me, or else why would they call in . . . for . . . help). I am responsible to my supervisor for the actions that I take, he is responsible to the owner of our company, and the owner is responsible to the FDA, and Hippa to insure that our software is capable of giving the practices that use it the ability to secure there patient data, and use there systems as medical devices with medical quality results.

If I fail and a patient is harmed because of it, my accountability ends with me being fired and possible fined. My manager can be fined and possibly fired if he is proven to be aware or vicariously responsible through negligence, the owner will likely have to pay a fine.

If the product does not work as intended from the get go that is different, then chances are I will not directly be accountable, however the owner will still be accountable, and the company as a by product will be responsible and will be fined.

Each situation and each action and each layer of responsibility is distinct. If no accountability via penalties where imposed, then those without conscience would rule the meek. Those without conscience would and could do as they please with no recourse. If we lived in a utopia maybe it wouldn't be necessary, but that isn't where I live sadly.

There really can be no general consensus on this topic, and that is why I feel only a specific example will get this topic back on track.

JMHO

If you give enough specifics, you can construct an example that everyone will agree with. No doubt about that. And if that's what you want to do, then it is, after all, your topic so you can direct it whatever way you wish.

My purpose has been to start from general ethical principals, and derive the best solution based on extrapolations of those ethical principals. In this manner, I feel that the majority is served best, rather than the minority.

But I would agree that there can be no general concensus on this topic simply because we have different goals and purposes in life and thus will naturally adopt different guiding principles.

Sorry just not how I think, everytime I try to think in general terms I can never get a solid answer, specific as it can get or as Einstein would say, as simple as possible and not any simpler.

So do you really think that everyone is solely responsible for themselves and everything that there choices impact regardless of influence or authority?

Yes it is evident that we think differently in that regard. To me, the principes are simple and the specifics are complex.


I don't feel like I have a good grasp of what that question entailed, so let me put it in my own words.

If you define responsibility as "cause", as it seems you are using it above, then I would say that I really think that everyone is ultimately responsible for their own condition.

Now let me put that into perspective. When one decides to play a game, there is the possibility of losing. So if one loses, one may assign the cause of that loss to the superior play of one's opponent. But it is one's own causative action of joining the game that made it possible to lose in the first place. Thus, one is ultimately responsible for the condition of losing.

When I think of responsibility I think about my brother. I try to understand what kind of cause is at work that makes it so that my brother cannot understand responsibility.

But I do not think the word "cause" is enough in any way to accurately describe it.

But certainly a time line of events are involved insofar as it requires that for someone to screw up everything in there life it requires causation.
Honestly I think in polite terms he is not wired to be effective nor fully capable to forge events into any way that does not rely on others.

Love him, but its tough.

There are a lot of dysfunctional people in the world. I have a brother who is basically psychotic and self medicates with alcohol. Totally irresponsible at times, and at other times seems perfectly normal. The bottom line is that you cannot live their lives for them, you can't lock them up unless they are dangerous to themselves or others.

They will undoubtedly suffer all the consequences of their actions and choices and there is no way you can protect them. (You can't protect an alcoholic by making alcohol illegal. They will buy a still and make their own alcohol.)

That they don't take responsibility for their own decisions only means that they will think of themselves as victims, they will blame others.

People who take advantage of others who cannot make good decisions are pathetic individuals themselves and they too will suffer the consequences of their actions.

That includes Kevin Trudeau...

That is the law of attraction. The law of Karma.

But for those who don't believe in that... they try to save everyone by regulating and controlling everything possible.

You can't save the entire world, and neither can government.

jb

Yea I am sorry to hear that JB, about your brother.

My brother doesn't do drugs or alcohol, never has. Unless you consider fried chicken and Yuguo cards or however you spell it drugs.

Kids toys and video games, he collects stuff, mostly toys. He has a hard time trying to use the internet becuase he cant read well, he tried for a while to sell on ebay, but communication is an important skill and he just doesn't have enough not to get in trouble. That and he cant help but get viruses you cant tell him enough what not to do. So he gets key loggers over and over again and they get into his account and screw it up even more then he did.

He hears things just plain wrong sometimes, you will say one thing then you can ask him to repeat it back and its either misplaced verbiage, including intent!, or just some other mysterious conversation.

He has always had learning disabilities I would say mostly due to the problems above.

BUT. He knows ever single detail about ever single toy he has, he can talks to kids on there level, in fact he is 34 years old but relates to kids half his age better.


At 9 he could dissemble electronics and put it back together functionally every time, and he was the only one in the house who could program the VCR when we finally got one.

He seems to have lost this knack, or maybe electronics has just become to complicated, I cant say really. BUT how I WISH he could get a job doing something anything like that.

I almost think he has a mild form of turrets also, because he has no real control over that inner voice . . . wow some of the things he says at totally random times.