
Who Blames the Victim? - pavornyoh
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/opinion/sunday/who-blames-the-victim.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
======
tzs
> IF you are mugged on a midnight stroll through the park, some people will
> feel compassion for you, while others will admonish you for being there in
> the first place.

(I'm assuming in the following that the park is known to be dangerous at
night).

And some, like me, might do both.

Suppose they took such a stroll, but did _not_ get mugged. Then admonishing
them for taking that reckless stroll would clearly not be blaming the victim
because there is no victim. The question in deciding whether or not to
admonish them in this case is whether or not it might help them avoid making
future bad decisions.

So why should that change if they _do_ get mugged? The mugging does not
retroactively alter whether or not the earlier decision to walk through the
park was reckless, and if an admonishment from me would discourage them from
doing the same thing in the future then it is still useful just as it is in
the no mugging case.

So, I'd feel and express compassion over the mugging, and also admonish them
for the flawed decision making that led them to take a walk through the
dangerous park to try to reduce the chances it happens to them again (but only
if I didn't think the mugging itself would do that).

~~~
poke111
I find it useful to distinguish between moral responsibility and causal
responsibility. One can bear some causal responsibility for acting recklessly
and putting oneself in a dangerous situation without assigning moral
responsibility to anyone but the perp. I wouldn't consider that victim
blaming.

