Calm Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 5 hours ago, mfbukowski said: If one could control one's thoughts, there would be no depression, no crimes of passion, and no need for general authorities to keep preaching that temptation is not a sin. I think young men in heat would disagree when all you can think about is sex, every moment if every day. It is constant and never stops Does that in any way change the fact that they are responsible? If someone has a problem with controlling their anger, do we give them a pass when they punch some guy for saying the wrong thing? 1
Jeanne Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 As for the hugs ..I just have to tell you all that that is what I miss the most about church. Those hugs would be the very first time for a week that I was even touched.
mfbukowski Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 12 minutes ago, Calm said: Does that in any way change the fact that they are responsible? If someone has a problem with controlling their anger, do we give them a pass when they punch some guy for saying the wrong thing? Ah, ok that is what you meant. I quoted myself a post or two above your comment above in answer to you, but I did not reply directly to you so you may have not seen it. I would call that controlling the RESPONSE to their thoughts or impulses and yes of course those are always under control or should be- at any rate those reactions ARE controllable at least in mentally healthy individuals. I think we need to make a distinction between "controlling one's thoughts" and controlling the REACTION or the behaviors one's thoughts provoke. That is an entirely different thing. On the other hand, if I were confronted by a lion while on a hike in Africa, choosing to do whatever I wanted in spite of the reaction it might provoke might not be wise.
Calm Posted December 6, 2016 Posted December 6, 2016 When I use "control", I assume people understand that I mean cases where we can choose to control or not. This would not cover instinctual responses, but would cover whether we choose to nurture instincts in positive, healthy ways or choose to nurture them in unhealthy ways. For example, a guy may have sexual thoughts when he sees a woman. He can then choose to respond by thinking to himself "she deserves my respect and these thoughts are not that so I need to work on focusing on 'this' quality of her rather than those things that cause me to see her only in a sexual way" or he can think to himself "what a slut". On the other hand, I see all of us responsible for our own thoughts, instinctual or nurtured. Very few are not accountable for dangerous behaviour even if "at fault" due to brain limitations they did not personally cause. Someone who drinks and then drives while incapacitated is accountable for the harm they caused. Someone who is significantly brain damaged when struck by that incapacitated driver and therefore becomes uncontrollably violent is not ultimately accountable for his actions, IMO, though responsible for the harm caused (there is a lot of overlap of terms and I don't require others to use "responsible" in the same way as I know maybe see it as identical to "accountable").
Woody Posted December 7, 2016 Posted December 7, 2016 On 12/2/2016 at 9:29 AM, bluebell said: Don't leave us hanging. What did the bishop do?? I think that best be left unpublished.
Recommended Posts