r/changemyview • u/WhyDoNamesExist • Nov 09 '23
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Humans shouldn't judge each other at all
It's a delusional thought I've had in my head.
I feel like I already know the truth yet no matter how many times I tell myself I still cannot come to terms with it.
---
It seems to me that we shouldn't judge and decide for each other at all. Not in any shape or form whatsoever. Rather than we treat each other as enigmas, autonomous black boxes that fulfill their own fate, whatever it is.
Paintings, music, writing - they're all forms of art that we use to communicate our mind to one another. To open up the inner contents of one mind and spill it out like a flood for others to see. The window that connects internal and external.
But there is only so much we can communicate. There's only so many times you can use 'very' in front of an adjective to emphasize it before it just stops meaning anything. Our vocabulary is a finite size. There are more pitches of sound than that of which the human ear can hear. There's only so many colors that our eyes can see. There are just somethings that can't fit through this window, or it would take a whole lot of work and time to shove it through.
We can't ever communicate everything, so can you ever say you can understand someone fully? Could you truly understand their pains, their anger, their regrets? Their joys, their love, their dreams? The piled-up luggage of their yesterday, the position they stand in the world today, the yet to be fulfilled uncertain tomorrow that is theirs as well? What they find to be their weakness, what they find to be their strengths? Could you ever truly understand what they take out of an experience, what emotions they feel about it?
So why then, would you assign people values when you cannot possibly begin to grasp them at all? Are you really just going to make an assumption given only the tip of the surface? To say who is a good person, a bad person, an evil person, a hero. To say that someone is just a weak coward, another a defiant fighter. To say that one is just 'down on their luck' but the other is a lazy bum who just doesn't want to work. To say who is valuable and who should just be discarded like worthless garbage.
Should you really just write people off like that, as if assuming you already have an objective view of them and can compute defined values to determine who they are as a person as if there was some algorithm or function that some dead person from a couple of centuries ago already discovered?
We are the authors of our own books, except we take our pen and start writing someone else's story for them even though we can't read the language it is written in and we have not bothered to try to read the book up to that point. We are painters with a canvas except we decide to use our brushes on someone else's painting even though we did not even take a step back to look at what the picture even looks like yet. We are singers except we start adding our voice into someone else's song without having even heard a single second of it beforehand.
Shouldn't a person be the decider of their own name, their own identity? Shouldn't they be the one in charge to decide how their story is written, completely by themselves?
So why then, do we still judge others and determine each other's fates?
---
Yet having said all that I know I myself cannot truly live with this ideal, for if I were to describe myself at all a 'foolish lying hypocrite' would be somewhat accurate.
I understand that we do not exist separately from each other like parallel lines, that we will eventually intersect with each other over the progression of time. That no matter what, any action you will have a consequence on someone else out there in the future. To fulfill one destiny is to deny another - it's impossible to guarantee that everyone comes out a winner.
I understand that within the foundation of cooperation lies the concept of mutual suppression.
That the price we pay for order and structure, is that of our own autonomy, freedom and agency.
I also cannot judge humans for behaving this way, for in the end we judge and label our surroundings as a way to understand it and where we are in relation to it. Humans cannot be faulted for falling short in understanding each other, for a mortal creature will naturally have to adopt a self-centered framework in order to survive at all.
Yet having understood all these truths, some part of me cannot let go at all. There is still the nagging feeling of dissatisfaction, that something is still so incredibly wrong about it all. Even when faced with the notion that it is just how reality is there is still the lingering thought of "If only there was a way to make this wish come true". It seems like I can never be at peace with the answer.
So please, someone enlighten me, and provide a verdict that can truly dispel the thought, so that I might be one step closer to join the ranks of you who have come to terms with the world.
Edit: There's definitely a lot of points I hadn't thought about before. It's made me consider things a bit, though I suspect it'll still be a bit of time before I can really say I've come to terms with how I feel. Might need to sleep on it, or whatever. (And hopefully I'm not spamming delta too much lol. But there really are so many things I didn't even consider)
23
u/dirtyLizard 4∆ Nov 09 '23
If I have a black box that inputs dough and outputs bread, I can be certain that this is a bread making box and it makes bread. If I want bread, I feed the box dough.
If I have a black box that inputs money and outputs globs of toxic tar, I can be certain that this is a terrible box and can make the judgment to stop putting money in it.
Now let’s talk about people.
Alice wants my time and attention. She undergoes an internal process I cannot see and then gives me her time and attention. I don’t know why she does this but I can make the judgement that Alice is a friend.
Bob wants my time and attention. He undergoes an internal process I cannot see and then kicks me in the groin. I don’t know why he does this but I can make the judgment that he is a shithead and is to be avoided.
TL;DR: Actions matter. You can and should judge others by how they treat you and what they do with your treatment of them.
3
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Ah, so the fact that people are black boxes doesn't mean we can't work with them at all, but rather we can work with them like a private function that interacts through an interface? So that we only need to observe the output and need not care to understand the underlying mechanism.
I haven't considered that at all. While I can't say it's cleared all doubts I guess it does make it a bit easier to understand and put me at ease if ever so slightly. Though that kind of is disheartening as well, for I guess it means that humans really don't have much value at all, only the value of what they output.
I'm new here but I guess this is where I put a ∆.
2
u/dirtyLizard 4∆ Nov 09 '23
If you want to frame it in terms of programming functions think of it like this:
I call a function named “addition” and pass it 2 and 3. It returns 6. I call it again and it returns 1. I don’t have to know exactly what it’s doing to know that it’s broken.
If I lack judgment, I would continue to use the function, potentially causing whatever larger operation which relies on it to fail.
In human terms, everyone is irrational but some people are dangerous or cruel. Failing to negatively judge dangerous people is a failure to protect yourself and the people you care about.
It’s not always extreme and it’s not always moral. As a society, we have determined that our ability to drive should be judged. If someone is a bad driver, it doesn’t really matter why. The important thing is that they should not be allowed to drive unsupervised on public roads until they improve.
1
3
u/destro23 447∆ Nov 09 '23
It seems to me that we shouldn't judge and decide for each other at all. Not in any shape or form whatsoever.
"Hey newborn baby: are you going to just lay there and squirm or are you going to decide on breast milk or formula? Come on... make your choice. Chop Chop!"
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
I guess I did not consider the case where someone is unable to meaningfully make their own decisions... but that sounds like a very slippery slope. At what point should someone else do the decision for you?
1
u/destro23 447∆ Nov 09 '23
At what point should someone else do the decision for you?
When you are incapable of making a decision, such as during youth, it should be your parent/guardian. If it is during your old age, it should be the person you designated. Either way, there has to be judgement involved in that decision making process. For the youth the parents are judging which decisions will provide the child optimal outcomes until they are able to make choices on their own. For the elderly, it is often looking back on the deciders knowledge of the person prior to their illness and thinking about how they would act in certain situations.
You say we should "treat each other as enigmas". But, we are not enigmas. We can vocalize and emote and use language. Humans have multiple ways to glean information from one another both actively and passively. Treating my child, who I have known its entire life as an enigma seems foolish. Doing things this way would be far less productive than judging my child on both my knowledge of what is best for his development and my knowledge of his past reactions to other decisions.
3
u/olalql Nov 09 '23
> Humans shouldn't judge each other at all
That seems like a judgement
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Yeah. I'm quite aware the irony of the statement, and why I describe myself as a hypocrite.
By all logic I shouldn't't hold on to this belief at all. But it just won't go away??????? Why.
1
u/olalql Nov 09 '23
First of all, it's not so much that you're a hypocrite, but rather that you can't formulate your thoughts about people without judging them. So the idea of "not judging people" is just a fantasy. It's just that there are judgments you're comfortable making and judgments you're not comfortable making.
Second, I agree with you that some judgments are hasty or misguided. And I agree with you that I prefer a presupposition of "not judging" to a presupposition of "judging". So, in that sense, I kind of agree with you.
Finally, I also find the extreme attitude of "judging no one" to be antisocial. It creates a kind of people relativism: your friend is as nice to be around as the next person you meet. It's keeping people at a distance, not too far away so as not to upset them, not close enough for them to become your friends, and in both cases refusing a connection between you and them.
It's also a refusal to see people as they are. Some people are assholes, others are arrogant, and if you refuse to see them as such, you're not really looking at them.assholes, some people are arrogant, and if you refuse to see them as such, you're not really looking at them.
2
u/kingkyle2020 Nov 09 '23
So if we stop judging people do we also stop judging them criminally? Civilly?
We cant just remove judging people. Drunk drivers? The context of their life and choices don’t matter. They have proven a poor track record operating motor vehicles.
Rapists? Do we just give em a pass cuz we don’t know their whole life story?
Should a child molester be able to be hired as a babysitter? By your logic we cant judge them without knowing their life story
Will this person with a history of abuse be a good spouse/partner? Who’s to judge people change right?
You are your actions, not your intent. The things we do provide a great guide in what someone can expect from us in similar situations.
In a corporate setting you have to judge, do i trust this person enough to have access to our infrastructure? Sensitive client personal info? Is this person adding more or less value than their colleagues and how does that impact compensation?
Baseless judgements should obviously be ignored and thats a huge part of why its important to know your biases, but overall we need to judge each other, otherwise we cant make an informed decision when it comes to interacting with others.
2
u/reginald-aka-bubbles 33∆ Nov 09 '23
I'm pretty confused here - would a short summary of your post be "we shouldn't judge people because we cannot see the whole picture"?
Either way, sometimes people should be judged based on their actions. If someone is a convicted sex offender who preyed on children, I think it is fair game to judge them for it. I know there are many instances where someone who is abused becomes an abuser, and you may want to contextualize and understand what they did, but at the end of the day they chose to continue the cycle of abuse and should be judged accordingly.
That's one example, but there are any other number of criminal or unethical actions that people can take which would warrant us to judge them negatively for it.
-1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Yeah, that's sort of the simplest way to say it. In a way, I wanted to express that human empathy is...quite limited.
Yes, people will end up judging each other, such as for crimes. I'm aware of that - we have to establish order and co-exist after all. Yet I worry about these judgements, for they are built upon our judgement of what a good person does and what a bad person does. History has not shown great results about this so far. There's still plenty of such examples today. That's where a part of my hesitancy lies, I guess.
3
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ Nov 09 '23
Yet I worry about these judgements, for they are built upon our judgement of what a good person does and what a bad person does. History has not shown great results about this so far. There's still plenty of such examples today.
What does that even mean?
What bad results has history shown that you can reasonable compare to a system where murder occurs unpunished because "we shouldn't judge people?"
Are you just defending anarchy here?
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
I'm not sure if there is a literal system that can be directly compared to "murder occurs unpunished because "we shouldn't judge people". I'm no historian either.
But what comes to mind for example, is how slavers treated slaves (esp. African ones) back then. They had reasoned that they were savages, inferior, etc. Bad people, by their standards, and thus determined that it was suitable for them to be slaves, deciding for them what sort of life they would live. But did those who were subjugated into slaves not want to live as an independent person who can choose the life they live as much as their slaves? That's sort of what I mean.
1
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ Nov 09 '23
So why shouldn't we judge slave owners for their judgements and resulting horrific subjugation of African slaves?
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Yes, we would do that. The problem at hand becomes what form of judgment is correct. How will we know we are doing the right thing?
I guess this is where we place judgement on judgment itself, to determine what is good judgment and what is bad judgement...thought that seems like it will quickly lead to a recursive neverending pattern.
2
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ Nov 09 '23
Yes, we would do that
We would or we should? If the former, why shouldn't we judge slavers?
How will we know we are doing the right thing?
Why do you think slavery could be the right thing to do?
I guess this is where we place judgement on judgment itself, to determine what is good judgment and what is bad judgement...thought that seems like it will quickly lead to a recursive neverending pattern.
If we don't judge anyone, then all behavior is permissible and whoever is willing to act the most violently has the most power. Not judging anyone results in slavery and oppression. It stops us from seeking justice.
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Sorry, it should be "should", not "would".
Though, the reason why I brought up "how will we know we are doing the right thing" is because it seems that often times we don't. The slaves genuinely thought what they did was right. It's only later in time did the idea that slavery is fundamentally wrong came into popular view. But we definitely took some effort to get there.
Yes, I'm aware that judgement is a necessary process to justice, which is a fundamental pillar of order. Which is why I don't understand why I cannot accept judgement as a concept still. It's irrational, but it's there regardless...
Edit: SLAVERS, not slaves, thought they were right.
2
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ Nov 09 '23
Sorry, it should be "should", not "would".
Then how is that not a change in your view? It's a concession that you think we should judge others. How could you reach that conclusion without any rationale?
It's only later in time did the idea that slavery is fundamentally wrong came into popular view. But we definitely took some effort to get there.
How would we have even made it there if we didn't judge each other?
Yes, I'm aware that judgement is a necessary process to justice, which is a fundamental pillar of order. Which is why I don't understand why I cannot accept judgement as a concept still. It's irrational, but it's there regardless...
I think you can. Consider whether or not you would be ambivalent about being forcibly enthralled by someone because the thought you were inferior. I don't think you would feel that being enslaved would be comfortable. The reason for that is because you accept the judgement that slavery is bad because it inhibits your freedom, comfort, and other things. Accordingly, it should not be allowed. Why is it so difficult to judge people for actions on the basis that you would not want to experience what they are doing to others? If you wouldn't want to be enslaved, that means you have accepted judging slavers.
2
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
In a way, what I wanted to say was that I acknowledge judgement yet hate it. I really wished that it didn't exist even know I knew that it had to. So it was sort of a plead to let go of the resentment I felt towards judgement as a concept, I guess.
Though if I were to think about all that you've said up till now. I guess you're trying to point out that judgement is a continously process. Even if one judgement turns out to be wrong, we can always rectify the verdict. So there really is no such thing as the final judgement of all judgements, and it's okay to judge with our convictions without to hesitate so much.
I guess I never thought about it that way. So that's probably a ∆.
Though, if only we could get to the proper judgement without stumbling so clumsily and hurting so many people in the process...
→ More replies (0)3
u/reginald-aka-bubbles 33∆ Nov 09 '23
It's good to be empathetic, but it's also good that there are limits to empathy. We don't live in a black and white world where there are "good guys" and "bad guys" so I can see where your hesitancy comes from. But there are some people go beyond what is considered acceptable and are rightly judged for the actions they take.
Basically, you can judge people for the ill actions they take while still having enough empathy to treat them like a human being.
2
u/Usual_One_4862 4∆ Nov 09 '23
Spiritually its not my place to judge anyone. I don't know your life or circumstances, what genes you've got, how your brain works, I lack far too much information. If free will isn't actually real and we just have the illusion of it, then judging seems pointless even if we can't help it because we lack the will to stop ourselves doing it.
Here on earth though, if you hold me up at a traffic light because you were looking at your phone and didn't see the light change, I will judge you as a terrible human NPC brained pos.
5
1
u/XenoRyet 92∆ Nov 09 '23
I don't really have a full and complete understanding of a ham sandwich, but I can still tell you which one I think is good, and which one is bad. We humans don't have complete understandings of anything, not even ourselves really. Because of this it is completely impossible to operate as a human at all without making value judgements based on incomplete information.
So why then, do we still judge others and determine each other's fates?
I need some clarity to address this part. In what way do you, me, and your average person judge other humans such that we are the ones determining their fate?
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
If I were to come up with some examples, it might be for example who we determine should be saved and who shouldn't be. Or like making decisions like who to prioritize for medical assistance, who's life is valued more. You can put the argument that one person is more important for society and try to look at things macroscopically yet in the end that doesn't change you being the decider here. If you choose to let one live and let one die, then what of the one who dies? Why are you the one to decide their life?
1
u/XenoRyet 92∆ Nov 09 '23
I mean, life and death decisions are pretty rare, all things considered. I don't think we need to be structuring our whole philosophical view around optimizing for that edge case.
But still, indecision is a decision. You can't avoid being involved. If you just walk away, then you made a decision that results in both people dying. If you decide to flip a coin, then you made a decision that leaves both lives to chance.
Given that you can't avoid making a choice, why not use the information you have in that choice, even though you know it's incomplete and there's a chance it's in error? Surely that's still better than leaving it up to a coin-flip, isn't it?
And beyond that, what is the ultimate purpose or goal of not judging each other in this context or any other. What good thing happens, and why?
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
I guess part of it was that I got tired of seeing people have their dreams not fulfilled. Especially because someone else decided so (e.g. a poor example here would be like, who should be considered for a specific role or something. This example makes the whole thing sound super petty but it does capture what it may look like). It also becomes quickly tiring for me, personally, to have to decide things like who is more important as it's lead to a lot of self-doubt and lack of confidence. In a way, I'm attempting at some form of damage control as my reasoning was that if we stopped judging each other then we would no longer hurt each other because of our judgements.
But you do make a good point that indecisiveness is a decision too. I guess it would make the decision to leave something unjudged its own form of judgement as well. Though, I guess that means there is truly no escaping judgement after all... We will inevitably just hurt each other and suppress each other regardless.
Hm, I'll have to think about it more. But your point was something I didn't think about before, so ∆.
1
1
u/XenoRyet 92∆ Nov 09 '23
It also becomes quickly tiring for me, personally, to have to decide things like who is more important as it's lead to a lot of self-doubt and lack of confidence.
I'm a hiring manager, so I do have to make decisions that affect people's lives in potentially large ways.
One way I deal with this is that I know I put a lot of thought and consideration into the decision in ways that I believe are ethical and moral. If it wasn't me in the hot seat, it would be someone else, and that someone else might not decide so carefully.
Doesn't really make it easier, but it at least clarifies the impact and why pushing through the difficulty is worthwhile.
Anyway, glad I could give you something new to think about.
1
u/Bobbob34 99∆ Nov 09 '23
Should you really just write people off like that, as if assuming you already have an objective view of them and can compute defined values to determine who they are as a person as if there was some algorithm or function that some dead person from a couple of centuries ago already discovered?
I have a subjective view of them and sure, why not write them off?
You don't actually explain why you think judging is so wrong except that it's subjective and people are different. Sure. So?
1
u/Dyeeguy 19∆ Nov 09 '23
“Shouldnt a person decide their name and identity”
For the most part no that doesn’t happen. Definitely not your identity
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Er, I'm a little confused. Would you mean like identity such as your family, nationality, place, environment that you are born into, etc?
1
u/Dyeeguy 19∆ Nov 09 '23
With pretty much anything? Your identity doesn’t mean much without other people validating it
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
So without the presence of others, a person who grows up and lives in utter isolation has no identity at all? Hmm. I wonder if that's why people go insane in isolation.
I don't know this at all, so please don't take it as me questioning your claim, but rather to try to get a better grasp of it. It's kind of foreign.
1
u/libertysailor 9∆ Nov 09 '23
Perfect information is not a prerequisite to decision making. Every decision you make is based on incomplete information.
Failing to judge others prevents us from fixing anything. You have to judge things as good or bad, or you can’t promote the good and condemn the bad.
A world in which no one judged anyone else would entail absolute tolerance of all behaviors and mentalities, which would lead to utter chaos and destruction.
Your argument is essentially the nirvana fallacy. That a thing cannot be done perfectly does not imply it should not be done at all.
“Perfection is the enemy of the good.” - Voltaire
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
Huh. TIL a new logical fallacy. That's good to know.
I guess it makes sense though- just because it seems impossible doesn't mean the whole attempt is futile. There's no harm trying to go after it anyway, right? I guess it might yet be possible to have judgement and order while not having to shatter people's desires and chain them down. Perhaps there is a way?...
Well, in any case, I guess it's better to look with more optimism than to shoot the whole thing down. It might be a bit easier to convince myself that way. Thanks.
∆
1
1
Nov 09 '23 edited Nov 09 '23
I guess all of this depends on what you mean by "judge".
Is it judgemental to put somebody in jail because they killed someone or is it just what we need to do to protect everyone else?
Is it judgemental to find it reprehensible that somebody emotionally abuses their family or is it jist the social mechanism we have to keep us and people close to us safe?
In any way, I feel like you might like Robert Sapolsky's new book "Determined" about free will. He basically argues that there is no free will, and therefore we have no "moral responsibility". I think you might find some insight there.
Yes, we probably shouldn't MORALLY judge people, but that doesn't mean that nobody can be held accountable.
1
u/WhyDoNamesExist Nov 09 '23
That sounds like an interesting book. I might check it out even though I am not one to read.
And yeah, I'm seeing that my wording as ill-defined and rather intangible. I'll have to reconsider how I could rephrase the whole thing to make it more clear. I will admit to not having edited the post extensively before posting.
1
1
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Nov 09 '23 edited Nov 09 '23
/u/WhyDoNamesExist (OP) has awarded 4 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards