Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime
[quote= Patrick]femaleking wrote: she took drugs and that is the one and only thing I'm judging her for. Is that not fair? -
no, of course that's not fair - it's either very immature or chilling. [/quote]
Oh dear, a sniff of 1984 here. What happened to our democracy and one's right of free speech? Why is FK's opinion immature and chilling? Words fail me.
Sorry Tony but I disagree. It's a sad fact that some people will not do anything with their life. Amy Winehouse is not one of these people, I'm talking about other drug users who choose to take drugs and do not wish to stop. These people shouldn't have the gift of life. It is unfair that so many people die young when they could have achieved something with their life. If I had the choice I would swap the drug users life with these people. I would call that fair but thats just me.
It is a noble idea that we should care for everyone because they are human. If an old lady across the street died and I spoke to her every day I would be upset. If a stranger died I would be shocked but my empathy would be with his family and friends not the man himself. When I turn the news on and see a murder, unless the murder was barbaric or there is something different to this murder to the countless others that happen around the world everything I would normally turn the channel over and have no sympathy for the victim.
I know most of my family thinks like this and I know several others who work along the same train of thought but I can see your idea about caring for everyone. I'm sorry to say it's not realistic.
[quote=SilentTony]I think that's an abhorrent way to think[/quote]
I think you misunderstand me. Let me give you an example: you hear about someone dying on the news - it makes you kind of sad, but you don't spend much time thinking about it. But then your child dies - your reaction is a LOT different. This is what I mean by people not being equal through an individual's viewpoint - I don't mean some kind of prejudice or callousness or anything like that, I'm merely pointing out the obvious bias towards close friends and family. Surely your child deserves more empathy from YOU. Maybe not in the grand scheme of things, but from you personally, as their parent. Do you see what I mean?
Another example - a celebrity dies and everyone is saddened. A child molester dies in exactly the same circumstances and people either don't care or are actually relieved that there's one less threat to their children. No matter how awful you think it is, this is just human nature. It's not my personal reaction - it's my observation of peoples' comments on news articles, discussions about stuff they've seen on the news etc. This is how I've seen humanity behave.
[quote=SilentTony]But because they are all humans and all part of us means we should feel empathy for all. Isn't that what charity is about, love, respect, kindness?[/quote]
It's easy to say that until one of those humans mugs you in the street or hits someone in the car they're driving drunk or sleeps with your partner. Then empathy, love and kindness go out the window for them. I'm sorry, Tony, but I can't see the world in black and white like that. Don't get me wrong, I love humanity in general, but moral obligations of 'love thy neighbour' get a bit muddled up when you look at individual cases.
Yes that is more clear thanks I do see what you mean. I dis give a list of priority in my post though. Those we love, those we care about and strangers. My family will always have more of me than a stranger but that doesn't mean a stranger will have none of me.
[quote=femaleking]It's easy to say that until one of those humans mugs you in the street or hits someone in the car they're driving drunk or sleeps with your partner. [/quote]
No it's the opposite because it isn't always easy. I also think you are missing my point. I'm not saying that all people are all good all of the time. I'm not saying that some people don't bring on misfortune unto themselves either. I don't judge them and it's for a very simple reason-every person who turns a wrong corner could be us if we lose our direction. I also wasn't talking about individual cases but was talking about the whole of human kind. Saying that even individual cases, and yes at times those who have done wrong to me in very bad ways, still have me love and empathy. They may not have my respect and that's something I think people are confusing into this debate.
[quote=st force] When I turn the news on and see a murder, unless the murder was barbaric or there is something different to this murder to the countless others that happen around the world everything I would normally turn the channel over and have no sympathy for the victim. [/quote]
That is probably one of the saddest things I've ever seen written in my whole life. How did this disconnect with your brothers and sisters happen? That is truly a very shocking statement and I feel a hollowness for reading it.
Like I said in my post SilentTony I'm not the only one. Unless the murder was different in someway to other murders I don't pay attention. They ha no impact on my life or anyone I know so why should I mourn them?
That is why I'm shocked and saddened Stf. Look your life and your mind so you deal with that anyway you want. I just don't understand how murder lost the brutal impact to some people. To me I'm appalled, disgusted and my heart breaks slightly whenever I hear of ANY murder. I think the moment we stop feeling like that is the moment we give up a little of our own humanity.
I think the impact of murder was lost when knife and gun crime started to rise. Many people today think it is normal. I guess I've just gotten used to seeing murder victems on the news.
Please, she's dead. If you didn't like her music, that's one thing and you don't have to be nasty about it; if you disagree with her lifestyle, that's yet another thing (but if you think 'choice' is part of addiction then you have no idea - and I'm glad for you that will probably never need to understand). But please, let her rest now.
I personally was, and will continue to be a huge fan of Amy's music so forgive me for feeling upset. She invested herself in her music, she wrote it all, she was inspired and she did inspire. Then drink and drugs demonised her - she blew it, no denying that, but once it had her in its grip she was already lost, by which time husbands and losers and record companies and everyone wanted a piece of her.
She was one of the most powerful singers I've ever heard in my life but had a weak and addictive personality. I hated what she did to herself, that she left her parents without a child - but I loved her music and her creativity.
And for the record, I too feel "appalled, disgusted and my heart breaks slightly whenever I hear of ANY murder" as Tony says (unless it's the murder of a child abuser); I honestly can't understand how anyone who has experienced adult life can feel otherwise.
Can we lay this thread and Amy to rest now please?
No it hasn't gone off topic really as it's a general outpouring which is how death affects people. Also don't feel guilty or bad or try to make amends if you don't feel it. Being true to your beliefs and your opinion is so important.
[quote=st force] I'm talking about other drug users who choose to take drugs and do not wish to stop. These people shouldn't have the gift of life. It is unfair that so many people die young when they could have achieved something with their life.[/quote]
I think this is a gross oversimplification of drug use and a very harsh judgement that those people 'shouldn't have the gift of life'.
Many people who abuse drugs have had horrific childhoods and turn to drugs for a purpose. They haven't had the advantage of having a secure and loving family or mother's unconditional love; many of them will have been emotionally and/or physically abused and neglected at significant points during their development (or continuously throughout their childhood). Even one-off traumas can be devasting if they are severe enough. Those people will never have learnt the life skills they need to function as a normal human being, let alone have the ability to achieve something with their life, especially if they don't have the right support behind them.
Children who are abused and neglected from birth, and whilst in the womb, have even been found to have developmental difficulties where parts of their brain don't develop as normal due to the abuse. This leaves them struggling with basic emotional functions and sometimes with learning difficulties too, which makes it harder for them at school, in terms of education and socially. They feel empty and desperate inside, like something's missing and there's a hole in their lives. They can't imagine what it's like to live in a secure and loving family environment therefore don't internalise the ability to self-soothe when in emotional distress and the strength to get up and sort their lives out. We never know what goes on in families, however 'happy' they present. Even the best-intentioned of parents can get it wrong and leave a child with such poor self-esteem that they can't even imagine being someone who was capable of achieving something with their life.
Therefore, it's not as easy as "They've got the choice not to take drugs, and they could make something of themselves if they tried." Also, trying to access services which could help them is difficult as they're under-funded, over-subscribed and don't always offer what that person needs. Add in a waiting list and you've got an ever longer addiction to manage. And it is an addiction which takes a hell of a lot of courage and determination to break out of, not only because of its physical effects (e.g. brain cells becoming dependent on its 'hit') but for what it means to that person (e.g. a way of coping with emotional distress, calming, escapism from bad memories) and the lifestyle that they've built up around it (e.g. having lots of drug-using friends). To break an addiction means changing every single aspect of your life and that is not easy, especially when you are a young and vulnerable person.
You might not understand but please don't judge an addict so unfairly. Many people don't want to rely on drugs to help themselves function in life; some do want drugs but that's because they can't cope emotionally without them due to the unbearable feelings they have inside and they don't have any support with that; most people fluctuate between wanting and not wanting to take drugs, desperately needing the feelings the drugs give them but also hating themselves for their dependency. Like most things in life, it's not a clear cut picture and definitely not one to cast judgement on when you've never been there yourself.
Every death is sad. Some will make us feel more sad than others and our level of sadness will also depend on how naturally empathic we are with others. I wouldn't be able to identify an Amy Winehouse song or pick her out photo if I was shown some but I feel a bit sorrowful that a young, talented woman died despite trying to battle her multiple addictions and I feel for her parents, family and other people she left behind who loved her. I feel equally sad when I hear about anyone who's died in other ways - the Norway shootings, a child getting hit by a drunk driver or a soldier dying in a war zone.
But isn't it necessary to judge people when they've done wrong things? If I didn't judge people who took drugs as having done something wrong, then how could I see the act of taking drugs as something harmful and destructive? I don't think it's wrong to judge people as long as you don't act on that judgement in a way that hurts that person. But we need to make internal judgements in order to define our moral structure. People need to have opinions, and, more than that, they have the right to an opinion.
Yes we do need to make internal judgements to drive our decisions. These shouldn't be taken lightly though, nor should they be about surface aspects or only on what we see for ourselves. To make any sort of judgement in life we need to be certain that we have as many facts as possible. Otherwise it's not a judgement but a prejudice.
I personally don't judge people because it's too difficult to be certain I've acquired enough facts about them or their situation to form a true picture in my mind. I'd hate to be judged for bad decisions I've made in my life because that's all they are, mistakes. I usually didn't mean them but a set of circumstances took me to a place where I normally wouldn't be. I learn from it, get out of it and hopefully never do it again. Not all people are as fortunate or have the ability to do this, and maybe one day I won't either.
So for me to turn and judge another human would not only be hypocritical it would be naive.
When I think of the words, "To judge", it suggests that I would be taking a moral high ground and putting myself in a superior positiion and looking down on those less able and less perfect than me.
I am not perfect so why would I expect others to be? We are all flawed in some way. We all make mistakes in our lives - some people make more serious ones than others - and I hope that people wouldn't judge me on mine either. LIke ST says, he can only make judgements when he have all the facts, and those opportunities are very rare. I totally agree with what he says and, at the end of the day, judgements are subjective and unique to the person who holds them.
I think part of the difficulty might be between definitions of 'opinion' and 'judgement'. I think opinions are fine as long as they're fair and balanced. We all have opinions, of course we do. But 'judgement' conjours up images of putting someone in a law of court and labelling them as 'right' and 'wrong', which isn't always as clear-cut as it seems.
[quote=girl friday]But 'judgement' conjours up images of putting someone in a law of court and labelling them as 'right' and 'wrong', which isn't always as clear-cut as it seems[/quote]
But sometimes necessary. It might not be right, but as humans we need to know the difference between right and wrong and we need to learn by other peoples' actions and by the results of those actions. I don't necessarily mean 'right' and 'wrong' in a moral sense, although that is the common connotation with the word 'judgement'. I don't think it needs to mean looking down on people either. If I make a judgement about someone, it tends to be quite detached, and often it doesn't make an impact on my relationship with them, if I have one at all. It's not always a bad thing. For example, I have a friend who smokes, and since I have strong feelings about smoking and strong concerns for his health (he's asthmatic as well), I think that if I didn't judge him for it and act on that judgement to encourage him to quit, I wouldn't be doing my duty as his friend to look out for his health. I don't have a lower opinion of him because of it, I just recognise that what he's doing isn't exactly the best course of action he could be taking.
[quote=girl friday]judgements are subjective and unique to the person who holds them.[/quote]
Well of course. Isn't that the point of the right of free speech? The fact that we all like and dislike different things and qualities. Our unique ways of thinking are what make us individuals and to take away the right of people to judge is taking away their right to be an individual. This is how we choose friends, business partners, lovers etc. We judge them to have certain desirable qualities, whereas we may find other people untrustworthy or unreliable and therefore we'll choose not to be so close to them.
[quote=SilentTony]Otherwise it's not a judgement but a prejudice[/quote]
I'm not sure about this. I see where you're coming from, and in certain cases you're probably right. But I still think this is a pretty sweeping statement. Prejudice implies hatred or at least some kind of strong emotional response, but if I were to judge a person as not being the kind of person I want to be friends with, I'd just move on with my life and probably not think much of them again. Certainly I wouldn't have any malicious feelings towards them. I just wouldn't associate myself with them unless circumstance threw us together, in which case I'd be genuinely civil and polite with them.
No prejudice is the correct word as it means to judge before you have all the information. It is to make an assumption and surely if you only know half of the story tat is all you are doing. It doesn't imply hatred unless attached to a prejudged assumption to a certain group of people based on ignorance.
[quote=femaleking]but if I were to judge a person as not being the kind of person I want to be friends with, I'd just move on with my life and probably not think much of them again. [/quote]
No you would make a decision based on an opinion formed by gathered facts and some assumptions. That is not a judgement because you would be basing this detachment on one or more aspects of the person's personality or flaws. You would not be basing it on the person as a whole. For instance I've had people who have hurt me and still have them in my life. I may only have them on the periphery or see them occasionally, but I know what they did was enough for me to remove them from a closer circle but I have more faith in other attributes they posses to remain in contact.
If I see a drunk in the street I know he didn't wake up one day and toss a coin between going to work and having a fulfilling life or becoming a ruin of his own potential. He is staggering on the pavement because of bad life choices, unforeseen problems and a myriad of other causes. Do I judge him for being a drunk or do I think how lucky I am for not being in his sole-less shoes?
Life is just a constant string of causality and there is such an inherent randomness in there that we cannot judge each others paths because those kinks in the string could happen to any one of us at any moment in the future.
[quote=SilentTony]That is not a judgement because you would be basing this detachment on one or more aspects of the person's personality or flaws[/quote]
Surely that may well be enough. If I told someone something personal and asked them to keep it to themselves and then they betrayed my trust and told everyone else, I would judge that person to be untrustworthy and wouldn't confide in them again. I don't think that's unfair - it's just learning from the evidence they've given me. If they somehow managed to redeem themselves and prove to me that they'd changed, then I would revoke my judgement. That's why it's not a prejudice - judgements can change and be updated.
I think that not judging people is much easier to say than actually do. It's such an innate human response. In fact, right at this moment you're judging the way I view the world, Tony, which is rather ironic given the discussion. I'm not saying that you think I'm utterly wrong about everything while you're right about everything - I don't believe that for a second. But the fact that you're discussing this with me and that you disagree with some of my points shows that you are making a judgement on my beliefs and opinions. I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. I too am judging you, though not in a bad way. I'm judging you as being someone with unwavering faith in humanity, and while I consider that a little idealist, I have the utmost respect for it because it gives me hope that there are people who can look at the world like that. So, you see, judgements don't have to be bad things, nor can we escape them, no matter how much society drums it into us that it's 'bad' to be judgemental - and therefore judging the judgemental people. Humans are many things - hypocrites, illogical, opinionated. And sometimes we just have to accept these things to some degree and admit to them, so at the very least we can know that we're being honest with ourselves. I guess my perspective on life is just that I'm unashamed to be human, and I'm unashamed to be flawed.
There's a lot of this happening in our society now. The demonising of certain groups by some right wing tabloids driven by the government's twisted agenda is frightening. This cultural monstering to people and groups who are caught in cross hairs of political ideology is increasing and we should all take care.
Ugh, tabloids. I heard about this earlier on the radio. I'm glad the guy has managed to get compensation! Writing sensationalist stories at the expense of people's reputations and rights is a terrible thing, but as long as the right of free speech remains, there's not much that can be done to stop them
I remember at the time being shocked at the media coverage directed against the bloke and feeling very uncomfortable about it. They'd only arrested him and he hadn't even been charged, let alone convicted. I remembered thinking, "If they've got the wrong man then it's a nightmare situation for him." I'm glad he got compensation and hope he got the top amount.
I warn everyone know this link is not for the faint of heart. It is a transcript of a murder of a ten year old girl. http://schadenfreudeuk.blogspot.com/2011/03/lesley-ann-downey-tape-transcript.html
It's people like that deserve to die. I fail to see another way.
I have a funny feeling that this is going to last a while so I'm going to back out now. I still stand by what I said, I would let some people die depending on what they have done or are doing and not lose any sleep about it.
What luxury blind opinion must be. I don't believe in murder for murder and anybody who thinks this is as complicit as the one who kills in my opinion.
Stf look for a film called 'The Life of David Gale'
I have to agree with Tony, StF - I don't think that anyone deserves to die. People deserve to be punished for crimes, and society deserves to be freed from them, but that's why we have prisons. I'm strictly against capital punishment because I disagree with murder in all its forms, and the fact that murder is legal in some countries through capital punishment disturbs me deeply. All human life is sacred and the moment we forget this is the moment when we need to step back and re-evaluate our morals.
Comments
no, of course that's not fair - it's either very immature or chilling. [/quote]
Oh dear, a sniff of 1984 here. What happened to our democracy and one's right of free speech? Why is FK's opinion immature and chilling? Words fail me.
It is a noble idea that we should care for everyone because they are human. If an old lady across the street died and I spoke to her every day I would be upset. If a stranger died I would be shocked but my empathy would be with his family and friends not the man himself. When I turn the news on and see a murder, unless the murder was barbaric or there is something different to this murder to the countless others that happen around the world everything I would normally turn the channel over and have no sympathy for the victim.
I know most of my family thinks like this and I know several others who work along the same train of thought but I can see your idea about caring for everyone. I'm sorry to say it's not realistic.
I think you misunderstand me. Let me give you an example: you hear about someone dying on the news - it makes you kind of sad, but you don't spend much time thinking about it. But then your child dies - your reaction is a LOT different. This is what I mean by people not being equal through an individual's viewpoint - I don't mean some kind of prejudice or callousness or anything like that, I'm merely pointing out the obvious bias towards close friends and family. Surely your child deserves more empathy from YOU. Maybe not in the grand scheme of things, but from you personally, as their parent. Do you see what I mean?
Another example - a celebrity dies and everyone is saddened. A child molester dies in exactly the same circumstances and people either don't care or are actually relieved that there's one less threat to their children. No matter how awful you think it is, this is just human nature. It's not my personal reaction - it's my observation of peoples' comments on news articles, discussions about stuff they've seen on the news etc. This is how I've seen humanity behave.
[quote=SilentTony]But because they are all humans and all part of us means we should feel empathy for all. Isn't that what charity is about, love, respect, kindness?[/quote]
It's easy to say that until one of those humans mugs you in the street or hits someone in the car they're driving drunk or sleeps with your partner. Then empathy, love and kindness go out the window for them. I'm sorry, Tony, but I can't see the world in black and white like that. Don't get me wrong, I love humanity in general, but moral obligations of 'love thy neighbour' get a bit muddled up when you look at individual cases.
[quote=femaleking]It's easy to say that until one of those humans mugs you in the street or hits someone in the car they're driving drunk or sleeps with your partner. [/quote]
No it's the opposite because it isn't always easy. I also think you are missing my point. I'm not saying that all people are all good all of the time. I'm not saying that some people don't bring on misfortune unto themselves either. I don't judge them and it's for a very simple reason-every person who turns a wrong corner could be us if we lose our direction. I also wasn't talking about individual cases but was talking about the whole of human kind. Saying that even individual cases, and yes at times those who have done wrong to me in very bad ways, still have me love and empathy. They may not have my respect and that's something I think people are confusing into this debate.
[quote=st force] When I turn the news on and see a murder, unless the murder was barbaric or there is something different to this murder to the countless others that happen around the world everything I would normally turn the channel over and have no sympathy for the victim. [/quote]
That is probably one of the saddest things I've ever seen written in my whole life. How did this disconnect with your brothers and sisters happen? That is truly a very shocking statement and I feel a hollowness for reading it.
I personally was, and will continue to be a huge fan of Amy's music so forgive me for feeling upset. She invested herself in her music, she wrote it all, she was inspired and she did inspire. Then drink and drugs demonised her - she blew it, no denying that, but once it had her in its grip she was already lost, by which time husbands and losers and record companies and everyone wanted a piece of her.
She was one of the most powerful singers I've ever heard in my life but had a weak and addictive personality. I hated what she did to herself, that she left her parents without a child - but I loved her music and her creativity.
And for the record, I too feel "appalled, disgusted and my heart breaks slightly whenever I hear of ANY murder" as Tony says (unless it's the murder of a child abuser); I honestly can't understand how anyone who has experienced adult life can feel otherwise.
Can we lay this thread and Amy to rest now please?
I think this is a gross oversimplification of drug use and a very harsh judgement that those people 'shouldn't have the gift of life'.
Many people who abuse drugs have had horrific childhoods and turn to drugs for a purpose. They haven't had the advantage of having a secure and loving family or mother's unconditional love; many of them will have been emotionally and/or physically abused and neglected at significant points during their development (or continuously throughout their childhood). Even one-off traumas can be devasting if they are severe enough. Those people will never have learnt the life skills they need to function as a normal human being, let alone have the ability to achieve something with their life, especially if they don't have the right support behind them.
Children who are abused and neglected from birth, and whilst in the womb, have even been found to have developmental difficulties where parts of their brain don't develop as normal due to the abuse. This leaves them struggling with basic emotional functions and sometimes with learning difficulties too, which makes it harder for them at school, in terms of education and socially. They feel empty and desperate inside, like something's missing and there's a hole in their lives. They can't imagine what it's like to live in a secure and loving family environment therefore don't internalise the ability to self-soothe when in emotional distress and the strength to get up and sort their lives out. We never know what goes on in families, however 'happy' they present. Even the best-intentioned of parents can get it wrong and leave a child with such poor self-esteem that they can't even imagine being someone who was capable of achieving something with their life.
Therefore, it's not as easy as "They've got the choice not to take drugs, and they could make something of themselves if they tried." Also, trying to access services which could help them is difficult as they're under-funded, over-subscribed and don't always offer what that person needs. Add in a waiting list and you've got an ever longer addiction to manage. And it is an addiction which takes a hell of a lot of courage and determination to break out of, not only because of its physical effects (e.g. brain cells becoming dependent on its 'hit') but for what it means to that person (e.g. a way of coping with emotional distress, calming, escapism from bad memories) and the lifestyle that they've built up around it (e.g. having lots of drug-using friends). To break an addiction means changing every single aspect of your life and that is not easy, especially when you are a young and vulnerable person.
You might not understand but please don't judge an addict so unfairly. Many people don't want to rely on drugs to help themselves function in life; some do want drugs but that's because they can't cope emotionally without them due to the unbearable feelings they have inside and they don't have any support with that; most people fluctuate between wanting and not wanting to take drugs, desperately needing the feelings the drugs give them but also hating themselves for their dependency. Like most things in life, it's not a clear cut picture and definitely not one to cast judgement on when you've never been there yourself.
Every death is sad. Some will make us feel more sad than others and our level of sadness will also depend on how naturally empathic we are with others. I wouldn't be able to identify an Amy Winehouse song or pick her out photo if I was shown some but I feel a bit sorrowful that a young, talented woman died despite trying to battle her multiple addictions and I feel for her parents, family and other people she left behind who loved her. I feel equally sad when I hear about anyone who's died in other ways - the Norway shootings, a child getting hit by a drunk driver or a soldier dying in a war zone.
But isn't it necessary to judge people when they've done wrong things? If I didn't judge people who took drugs as having done something wrong, then how could I see the act of taking drugs as something harmful and destructive? I don't think it's wrong to judge people as long as you don't act on that judgement in a way that hurts that person. But we need to make internal judgements in order to define our moral structure. People need to have opinions, and, more than that, they have the right to an opinion.
I personally don't judge people because it's too difficult to be certain I've acquired enough facts about them or their situation to form a true picture in my mind. I'd hate to be judged for bad decisions I've made in my life because that's all they are, mistakes. I usually didn't mean them but a set of circumstances took me to a place where I normally wouldn't be. I learn from it, get out of it and hopefully never do it again. Not all people are as fortunate or have the ability to do this, and maybe one day I won't either.
So for me to turn and judge another human would not only be hypocritical it would be naive.
I am not perfect so why would I expect others to be? We are all flawed in some way. We all make mistakes in our lives - some people make more serious ones than others - and I hope that people wouldn't judge me on mine either. LIke ST says, he can only make judgements when he have all the facts, and those opportunities are very rare. I totally agree with what he says and, at the end of the day, judgements are subjective and unique to the person who holds them.
I think part of the difficulty might be between definitions of 'opinion' and 'judgement'. I think opinions are fine as long as they're fair and balanced. We all have opinions, of course we do. But 'judgement' conjours up images of putting someone in a law of court and labelling them as 'right' and 'wrong', which isn't always as clear-cut as it seems.
But sometimes necessary. It might not be right, but as humans we need to know the difference between right and wrong and we need to learn by other peoples' actions and by the results of those actions. I don't necessarily mean 'right' and 'wrong' in a moral sense, although that is the common connotation with the word 'judgement'. I don't think it needs to mean looking down on people either. If I make a judgement about someone, it tends to be quite detached, and often it doesn't make an impact on my relationship with them, if I have one at all. It's not always a bad thing. For example, I have a friend who smokes, and since I have strong feelings about smoking and strong concerns for his health (he's asthmatic as well), I think that if I didn't judge him for it and act on that judgement to encourage him to quit, I wouldn't be doing my duty as his friend to look out for his health. I don't have a lower opinion of him because of it, I just recognise that what he's doing isn't exactly the best course of action he could be taking.
[quote=girl friday]judgements are subjective and unique to the person who holds them.[/quote]
Well of course. Isn't that the point of the right of free speech? The fact that we all like and dislike different things and qualities. Our unique ways of thinking are what make us individuals and to take away the right of people to judge is taking away their right to be an individual. This is how we choose friends, business partners, lovers etc. We judge them to have certain desirable qualities, whereas we may find other people untrustworthy or unreliable and therefore we'll choose not to be so close to them.
[quote=SilentTony]Otherwise it's not a judgement but a prejudice[/quote]
I'm not sure about this. I see where you're coming from, and in certain cases you're probably right. But I still think this is a pretty sweeping statement. Prejudice implies hatred or at least some kind of strong emotional response, but if I were to judge a person as not being the kind of person I want to be friends with, I'd just move on with my life and probably not think much of them again. Certainly I wouldn't have any malicious feelings towards them. I just wouldn't associate myself with them unless circumstance threw us together, in which case I'd be genuinely civil and polite with them.
[quote=femaleking]but if I were to judge a person as not being the kind of person I want to be friends with, I'd just move on with my life and probably not think much of them again. [/quote]
No you would make a decision based on an opinion formed by gathered facts and some assumptions. That is not a judgement because you would be basing this detachment on one or more aspects of the person's personality or flaws. You would not be basing it on the person as a whole. For instance I've had people who have hurt me and still have them in my life. I may only have them on the periphery or see them occasionally, but I know what they did was enough for me to remove them from a closer circle but I have more faith in other attributes they posses to remain in contact.
If I see a drunk in the street I know he didn't wake up one day and toss a coin between going to work and having a fulfilling life or becoming a ruin of his own potential. He is staggering on the pavement because of bad life choices, unforeseen problems and a myriad of other causes. Do I judge him for being a drunk or do I think how lucky I am for not being in his sole-less shoes?
Life is just a constant string of causality and there is such an inherent randomness in there that we cannot judge each others paths because those kinks in the string could happen to any one of us at any moment in the future.
Surely that may well be enough. If I told someone something personal and asked them to keep it to themselves and then they betrayed my trust and told everyone else, I would judge that person to be untrustworthy and wouldn't confide in them again. I don't think that's unfair - it's just learning from the evidence they've given me. If they somehow managed to redeem themselves and prove to me that they'd changed, then I would revoke my judgement. That's why it's not a prejudice - judgements can change and be updated.
I think that not judging people is much easier to say than actually do. It's such an innate human response. In fact, right at this moment you're judging the way I view the world, Tony, which is rather ironic given the discussion. I'm not saying that you think I'm utterly wrong about everything while you're right about everything - I don't believe that for a second. But the fact that you're discussing this with me and that you disagree with some of my points shows that you are making a judgement on my beliefs and opinions. I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all. I too am judging you, though not in a bad way. I'm judging you as being someone with unwavering faith in humanity, and while I consider that a little idealist, I have the utmost respect for it because it gives me hope that there are people who can look at the world like that. So, you see, judgements don't have to be bad things, nor can we escape them, no matter how much society drums it into us that it's 'bad' to be judgemental - and therefore judging the judgemental people. Humans are many things - hypocrites, illogical, opinionated. And sometimes we just have to accept these things to some degree and admit to them, so at the very least we can know that we're being honest with ourselves. I guess my perspective on life is just that I'm unashamed to be human, and I'm unashamed to be flawed.
Mr Jefferies, Jo Yeates' landlord:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14339807
Poor guy.
It's people like that deserve to die. I fail to see another way.
I have a funny feeling that this is going to last a while so I'm going to back out now. I still stand by what I said, I would let some people die depending on what they have done or are doing and not lose any sleep about it.
Stf look for a film called 'The Life of David Gale'