Topics Ethics

Question When dealing with people and the way they are, I always try to put myself in their shoes, and try to see things in their perspective. seeing things in this way, I always find a way to justify anyone's actions that would otherwise be considered wrong, hateful, dumb, etc. If someone does something insulting towards me, I'll find a way to not dislike that person, again, by thinking deep into what kind of reasoning goes on in the mind of the person who caused me harm. It seems like there's always a reason behind someone being the way they are... Whether it's their culture, their geographical location, their friends, music they listen to, clique, past experiences, political stance, something wrong with the wiring in their head. Being this way can both be a good thing and a bad thing. Good in a sense where I feel like there's always a good person behind their questionable actions, but bad in a way because... well... anything that anyone does can be justified (in my mind), and that just can't work, for obvious reasons. Am I being naive in thinking this way? Is it fair to be understanding of people's actions, and on the other side of the coin, understanding why people don't understand your actions and just take it the wrong way? And at what point do you draw the line and say to yourself, "I don't care what you've been through, there are certain things you did that you did where you should have known better"...

Accepted:
May 6, 2008

Comments

On balance, I think the habit of trying to find the most charitable explanation for another person's action is an admirable one. And empathy can be a valuable tool for understanding people, heading off prejudice, rash judgment, undeserved condemnation. It also can be a vigorous intellectual exercise; some actions are so questionable that you have to tell an outlandish narrative to justify them.

You have to realize that although you can think up an ethically sound justification (and the more you practice, the better at making them up you're likely to become), that justification may not express the person's actual motivation or rationale. To the extent you forget this, and really believe the excuses you're imagining, then yes, I'd say you're being naive.

Is it fair to be this way? On the face of things, it's heroically fair. But look deeper, and perhaps it is not. Your imagined justifications may preclude blame, but only at the cost of the person's responsibility. It may be more unfair to think of someone, "You are not responsible for anything you do, as it's all determined by forces beyond your control," than it is to think, "You have done something morally wrong and are culpable." The first line of thought denies the person's autonomy, and there's a long-standing philosophical tradition of locating human dignity precisely in the individual's autonomy.