I wrote a reply, twice as long as yours, that started with the line:
"Hm. At the risk of blatantly ignoring the point of this post..."
Basically, and more lightly, the contents were: You don't seem to account for the fact that some people feel responsible for their actions, now and in the past, and that some feel it is right and proper to expect the same from others as well. It would not work to ask someone to not do that to themselves without changing their whole view and moral standards on others first. The question is: should they?
So, it can sound like you don't think people need to take responsibility for their past behavior - especially not for those influenced by emotions or urges - as the emotions have since waned, or the intesity that lead to acting on them is not currently at that level. It could also be said that you act like there's no such thing as free will (which I know is a real "-ism" - I have read about it in the past, so if you don't, that's fine; just a statement).
Do you have a reaction to that, or are you outraged by the inappropriateness of my response? My original post said not to be angry at me, because this post has been written by a neuro-electrochemical storm in the past, that no longer exists.
"
I didn't write that! When "I" saw your post "I" was stimulated to start debating your views, ignoring the OP. Now that I expressed them, I no longer care. I'm not going to write that same reply
again, not now that you've read it. I'm over that urge. Why should I be judged on those actions, I'm no longer in that chemical state."
(couldn't leave it out
)Some people would react differently to a thinking as above if there person was laden with guilt. Translate this to such a someone, looking at their present self and reflecting on their so-called "kid self" - which is no real thing, following your construct. I'm going to cut off my train of thought, because I'm heading towards writing a pretty much just as long reply as before. My point should be clear by now.
EDIT: I know, I don't care.
No matter how convincing the illusion of a perpetual, unitary self moving through time and space seems, there is a more rational way to see the past in relation to who you are in this moment, and that is to treat any past selves as events from which lessons can be learned.
That's a good line. I think in this context it'd help if he understood the things he did, and why he did. If I seem to get the urge to murder strangers, and one day, I don't know what happened, I just lose control (neuro-chemical storm) and killed someone randomly... I might feel guilty about it, and tell someone. They don't care, they say it's fine. I start forgetting about it, a month later, it happens again. In total this ends up happening 10 times. 4 years after the last kill, I start remembering the things I did, not really sure why, how, or what happened exactly. Never contacted the families, never went to prison, never been hated for it. It's not easy to look at those murders and just see them as a "lesson to be learned" and move on... Boy, this is excessive. *leaves*
-- Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:03 pm --
I left and started thinking about this. Isn't it funny I seem to exhibit a duality in that post? One part of me clearly saying this is not the place to discuss this, the other part constantly dismissing it and mocking it saying he doesn't care at all?
<I deleted more stuff here, partially because I got fed up of writing and didn't want to finish it>
-- Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:04 pm --
I left and started thinking about this. Isn't it funny I seem to exhibit a duality in that post? One part of me clearly saying this is not the place to discuss this, the other part constantly dismissing it and mocking it saying he doesn't care at all?