When do you try to understand where the other person is coming from?

This is one of the big things for me and my world view. It’s important to reason on the causes of actions. What makes someone do the bad things that they do? Many (maybe most) people believe in black and white good and evil where some people fit into the Good column and the rest go on the bad. They believe these imaginary columns are answers enough so swift and often poorly calculated retaliation follows.

A focus on causes for decisions is important to me because I believe therein lies the opportunity to correct errant decision making for a more longer lasting and globally beneficial effect.

“ill-will” and “good-will” are not magical answers to people’s actions. They are instead ratings of the quality of rational thought that went into those actions.

I do care what people do in the world because it does not only effect the person that has been hurt but it also effects all of us.
We think of why these things happen but do not come up with the exact answer because we are not that person who has done the wrong thing to hurt people.

Yes, I do. Even when it comes to moral absolutes I think it is important to find out how someone got to that point. Unless you believe that some people are simply born evil then there is always a route, a path that someone follows between being a newborn and being murderer or a pedophile. At least that’s what I think. It doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be held accountable for what they do, certainly not, it just means that I think we should try to understand what happened, if only to help create a society where we could possible intervene and keep newborns from turning into murderers and pedophiles. If not for their sakes, then for our own protection and safety. And if only to be able to create a safer society, a lot people need to understand what the difference between an excuse and an explanation; so many people don’t seem to get that one at all. That’s the short answer.

I may have a good working knowledge of what their motives ( conscious or unconscious ) might be, but, ultimatley it matters not.

As a favorite saying of mine goes…..

” If you understand it is what it is, if you don’t understand it is what it is.”

Yep, doesn’t matter who forgot to lock the barn door, the horse is gone. lol

“When do you try to understand where the other person is coming from?”

When I think they might give me a ride to help get me where I’m going.

A shrink told me once that anti social or simply socially unacceptable behavior is like an 4 cylinder internal combustion engine firing on only 2. There is something wrong, a short circuit in the way the neurons fire in the brain. I often wonder how much nurture vs nature does play into it. I try to understand but if I can’t, I don’t dwell on it, it makes me depressed and helpless and all sorts of feelings I don’t like to deal with unless there is something I can do about it.

That shrink should read up on Rosa Parks.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies – That sort of civil disobedience didn’t enter into my mind nor I think the shrinks when he gave me that answer. It seems as if that is entirely different situation than rape or murder. Do you think a man rapes in order to achieve equality?

There are many reasons given for rape. There are many reasons given for why someone would not want to sit in the back of a bus.

It depends on the situation. Things like rape/pedophilia though IMO have no justifications what so ever though to me. So my understanding usually goes as far as, there is something seriously fucking wrong with this person and they need help.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies -well I personally cannot think of any good reasons for rape, striving for equality is completely different. You are comparing apples and oranges. I don’t understand what point you are trying to make at all.

Your choice of words was “socially unacceptable behavior”, and offered a shrinks diagnosis for what that means.

Point being, that social behavior is not a biological or neurological issue. Thus no such diagnosis should be attributed to social issues. Used to be that a Roman citizen could murder his own child if it were mentally retarded. It was socially acceptable. Used to be that a Jewish drunk could be stoned to death by his neighbors. It was socially acceptable.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies – I think you are playing semantics and I don’t want to. Believe what you want and I will believe what I want.

“Point being, that social behavior is not a biological or neurological issue.” Oh Really?

That’s head trauma @ZAGWRITER. Head trauma is not a social behavior.

head trauma can cause neurological issues that lead to unacceptable social behavior.

Yes it can. Though I am unfamiliar with any head trauma cases which have lead to rape or civil rights movements. As well, society attempts to compensate for socially unacceptable behavior when the issue of head trauma is known.

Has anyone ever tried to imagine the thinking of someone who does socially unacceptable things? Like get into their head and see how their behavior could makes sense to them, even if it is heinous?

Yes I have. But I don’t limit my imagination to our culture in our time. There are, and have been many social practices throughout history which seem perfectly acceptable to the cultures at the time and place they occur. Yet those same practices often seem quite “heinous” to us in our current culture.

Everyone lives in their own reality, since perception IS reality!

This is fine, but…has not a whit to do with character.

Anyone that has serious character disorders that enable them to deceive, abuse or otherwise inflict mental, emotional, physical or spiritual harm upon others is a poster child for dysfunction and if one allows and excepts these behaviors in their lives they are just as dysfunctional.

I may understand the nature of your dysfunction but I won’t make excuses for it and I will swiftly eliminate you from the fold.

Bye bye black sheep! lol

I am curious as to what’s behind people’s actions but I still weigh what they do in terms of damage or advantage and what value they have if I keep them close. I can understand, empathize and have compassion for the childhood of a rapist but that doesn’t sway my belief they need to be kept away from the general population.

Well it is an instinct for me to try to put myself in somebody else’s shoes. When it comes to cases of murder or manslaughter (especially in cases of abuse) I especially do this.

Understanding is one thing. Acceptance is another. Sometimes the one should not result in the other. It’s not the healthy course of action. Certainly in some fields we are called upon to understand and sit with radical acceptance meant to be a container for treatment. That doesn’t mean you would invite those same people to be part of your own inner sanctum of associates. I should hope in certain circumstances people could discern that despite HOW someone got to where they are…they still aren’t healthy and would contaminate others by association.
But you bring up the question of morals. Humans have a somewhat universal set of values and morals that most of us agree upon. And then life throws context into the mix and this results in paradoxical moral dilemma.
In your post to site some suggestions. Murder is murder until you are at war and then we tend to dismiss the behavior as murder even when civilians are the victims. Most all cultures around the world have strong taboos about the sexual violation and exploitation of youth. In the one culture where it was condoned as ritual it was observed that it produced extremes in rage and violence in the youth. And so most of us would concur that this is an abomination and that we don’t really care how it evolved when it is evident we want to weed the person out and exclude them from society. In terms of rape there comes discussions about gender rights. Those discussions are often painful for women and men who have been victimized by rape.
But on “cheating” I would suggest a change in how the behavior is labeled and discussed. There is a behavior here that has existed for as long as man has. It appears to have significant benefits that get dismissed under the mythological premise that all humans are monogamous and should have only one partner for life…a fundamental religious premise.
“Cheating” would be better described as Taking on secondary emotionally intimate or sexually intimate partners…usually both. The reasons for doing so may be part of a pattern of dysfunction or they may be part of a pattern of attempting to honor the health and wellbeing of oneself against the larger societies needs for stability and the stability provided by creating a home base with a primary partner. Currently those falling into the monogamous grouping would like to throw out the baby with the bath water and see themselves as both victims and superiors in this dynamic when in fact their partners maybe attempting to faciliate their own high functioning while keeping in place a system serving others they are involved with. It may be more adaptive, more creative, and a reflection of more character traits to maintain what is necessary to the well being and survival of others while not sacrificing your own needs. It may be a matter of not cheating yourself if you are the one developing a secondary relationship. And in that it may also be a matter of not cheating your spouse or children of the very real financial resources created by the property state of marriage.
Of course my position is a novel way of looking at the issue. But I think it’s a position long overdue for serious discussion.