Skip to main content

Judgement

It is easy to judge someone as good, or bad, or fun, or boring, or malicious or a criminal (like the legal system does). But putting a blanket judgement on a person shows an inherent misunderstanding of what a person is. A person is not good or bad - his or her ideas (beliefs, impulses etc.) are what are correct or incorrect (rational or irrational). It's the ideas that need to be corrected.

We need not stop at blaming the ideas (as opposed to the person). The ideas (in most cases) did not creatively emerge in the person's mind. They were installed there by mechanisms. And those mechanisms need to be corrected as well. For human beings those mechanisms are - culture (broadly, which encompasses things like - parenting, religion, social norms, beliefs etc.), negative life experiences like trauma, disease, other people with incorrect ideas etc.

So making a judgement on a person and blaming the person is the same as making a judgement on badly cooked pasta and blaming the pasta for it. It is not the pasta that is to be blamed but the fault lies in the ingredients (the ideas) and the chef (the mechanism which input the ideas). (Now it is another story that the chef is a person also, and his ideas about how to cook pasta were installed in him through other sets of mechanisms....but you get the picture).

So taking the example of the justice system - blaming a "criminal" and punishing him/her as a "solution" to the bad behavior is actually counter productive since it lets the actual criminals (the bad ideas and the mechanisms that installed those in the person's mind) have a free pass. The focus should be on correcting the ideas and the mechanisms, not blaming  and punishing "criminals". Bad behavior should be corrected by removing the incorrect ideas from the person's head and replacing them with correct ones. And this cannot be done with coercion. It has to happen through the person's own creativity - we just have to make it possible for that to happen. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should one be thankful since the “probability” that one exists is so low ?

  Should one be thankful since the “probability” that one exists is so low ? Not really - thinking of probability in these terms is meaningless when we don’t understand a lot of things - eg consciousness, qualia, creativity etc. It’s like buying a KitKat and asking what is the probability that this exact KitKat is in my hand right now out of the billions that have been manufactured and why KitKat and not katkit (ie why did they name it KitKat) etc. Such probabilities are meaningless. I understand where this line of thinking comes from - wanting people to appreciate life more given how “improbable” it is that we are here. But that’s not the reason to appreciate life in my opinion and this kind of reasoning - first of all is not useful and secondly doesn’t have much meaning as I said. There are reasons to appreciate life of course even though we don’t understand a lot of them yet (since philosophy, including moral philosophy hasn’t ma...

Old movies are better?

 Someone said some time back "I love older movies, they are so much better. They don't make movies like that anymore - older movies are so much better". I promptly pointed out this reasoning is mistaken. The fact is that there are a LOT more older movies than newer movies. Like a lot lot more. If you classify newer movies as movies released in the last 5 years, there are like perhaps a 100 times more movies made from the dawn of cinema till 5 years ago. So even if say only 5% of older movies are good as compared to 10% of newer movies (which is the other side of the preposition) even then there would be 50 times more "good" older movies then newer movies.