If I know nothing can I be responsible for anything?

[coberst]

If I know nothing can I be responsible for anything?

Hogan's Heroes was an American television situation comedy that ran from 1965, to 1971. The show’s stage, a fictional account of Stalag 13, is situated in a German POW camp during the Second World War. The program featured Colonel Klink as the commandant of the camp and Hogan as the leader of the prisoners; Sergeant Schultz was the somewhat loveable and ever bumbling individual who was in charge of the prisoners. The prisoners were a crew of American and Allied prisoners who assisted Hogan in running a Special Operations group from the camp.

The prisoners were continually concocting a brew of shenanigans designed to fool Klink. Schultz seemed to constantly stumble upon these prisoner designs as they were being prepared and to immediately turn his back, cover his eyes, and say “I know nothing”; so as to position him self as ignorant and thus blameless for anything that might happen.

Sergeant Schultz constantly sought to have the excuse of ignorance of everything going on so that Colonel Klink would not send him to the Russian front should some of the prisoners escape.

I think that many American citizens follow the logic of Sergeant Schultz; they cultivate and embrace a veil of ignorance to protect them selves from having to accept responsibility for anything that might happen.

If I know nothing can I be blamed for anything?

[billl]

How are some American citizens like that?

[BienvenuJDC]

Yes...you can be blamed for being ignorant...

[Stargazer86]

Being indifferent or ignorant does not excuse one from responsibility or blame.

Speaking of Hogan's Heroes, are you familiar with the story of it's star, Bob Crane? Seedy life and questionable death. It's relevent, in a way, to the question you put forth here.

[RichardHresko]

Willful ignorance such as exhibited by the Schultz character obviously does not exculpate someone.

There is a difference between deliberately avoiding information and having doubts, or being unwilling to explore an unpleasant fact. It is doubtful that a clean dividing line can be found demarcating what is legitimately beyond one's ken and what is purposeful ignorance.

[coberst]

We humans remain ignorant because we want to be ignorant. To be ignorant is to consider one's self to be blameless for whatever happens. We are fearful of freedom. We think that freedom is a state of irresponsibility and ignorance shields us from responsibility.

I do not think that this is in our genes but it is a result of the society that we have created.

I think that we can create a better society and we must start by becoming self-actualizing self-learners and Critical Thinking independent fair-minded citizens.

[RichardHresko]

We humans remain ignorant because we want to be ignorant. To be ignorant is to consider one's self to be blameless for whatever happens. We are fearful of freedom. We think that freedom is a state of irresponsibility and ignorance shields us from responsibility.

I do not think that this is in our genes but it is a result of the society that we have created.

I think that we can create a better society and we must start by becoming self-actualizing self-learners and Critical Thinking independent fair-minded citizens.

Way too much generalizing here.

First, given that humans are limited creatures, it is hardly willfulness in any meaningful way that accounts for the majority of our ignorance. Have you wanted to remain ignorant of the Navajo language?

There is a question of what freedom actually consists. Is freedom the right to make choices, as many moderns believe? Or is freedom the ability to act rightly, as medievals thought? Or is it something else entirely?

Give us evidence for this "we" you refer to. It doesn't sound very fair-minded of you to make claims as to how other people think without offering proof, citizen.

[billl]

I'm not sure if all ignorance is bad. Well, it's kind of a loaded word, "ignorance," but it's hard to come up with a better one. I don't want to be accused of saying "ignorance" is good. However, I think it might be possible to view certain intelligent decisions as being a sort of embrace of ignorance.

For example, I don't know what heroin is like, but I know that it's more difficult to quit than cigarettes, so I'm not interested in fleshing out my knowledge of the experience. Others will be more expert than I am. The same goes for all manner of violent crime (doubly so, in fact). And, steering more towards the intellectual arena, I also tend not to spend too much time researching the doctrines, sermons, and personalities that guide certain religious cults, etc. A detective investigating abuses might want to do such research, but the rest of us would as likely be wasting our time reading propaganda. Sometimes, the direction in which we steer our intellect is a choice that demands ignorance of one thing, on behalf of our attention on some other front.

Returning to Sergeant Schultz--no matter how we might want to deride him for his clumsiness, he certainly was lovable. I think he was fond of the prisoners, and adopted the "veil of ignorance" as a reflex against what he intuited would be terrible consequences (to Hogan and the others) if he were to report an escape/espionage scheme. That he would be disparaged for a lack of intellectual curiosity is, considering the circumstances, pretty inappropriate. I think Sergeant Schultz is a perfect example or why the drive to put such a focus on developing other people's intellects needs to be carried out with caution and a sense of balance. I think he was well-aware (not at all ignorant) of what curiosity and persistence might have led to--he certainly cared about what happened. How we respect others is an even more important area for societal improvement than how we improve our other CT abilities, in my opinion. Really, I think it should be a key concern of CT--one that other CT abilities are, in fact, in service of.

Frankly, I think that Schultz was a poor choice for prison guard. He shouldn't be blamed for that, we shouldn't expect him to bring danger to his friends, and damage to his conscience, simply because the system demanded it. His choice of friendship over "blind" duty to a power-hierarchy was the right one for him. I think it is a lack (on the part of the system that Sergeant Schultz was employed by) of sensitivity to an individual's strengths and weaknesses that likely would have led to such a mismatched job placement.

[Judas130]

you really don't hold a lot of hope for your countrymen at present do you coberst?
peace

[coberst]

you really don't hold a lot of hope for your countrymen at present do you coberst?
peace

I started 5 years ago with the assumption that Americans do not have the intellectual sophistication to recognize the problems we face and with the intent to make this situation known to them. All evidence that I have seen since then varifies my assumption. Furthermore I see no indication that they have the sophistication to comprehend this failure and thus cannot do what is necessary to fight our failure.

This is not a failure of intellect but is a failure of character.

[Smoogles]

I started 5 years ago with the assumption that Americans do not have the intellectual sophistication to recognize the problems we face and with the intent to make this situation known to them. All evidence that I have seen since then varifies my assumption. Furthermore I see no indication that they have the sophistication to comprehend this failure and thus cannot do what is necessary to fight our failure.

This is not a failure of intellect but is a failure of character.

I am but saddened to see that this is what faith we have in our country, the greatest country in the world. There has to be some people doing something right, the proof is all around. Although this may depend on where you live. Everyone still immigrates to America, why do you think everyone wants to be here? Because of the opportunity, it's just up to the individual to seize it. I am curious as to what evidence you see of us not wanting to understand situations? I am sure people try to understand, but possibly come up with something less right than another idea. We have our own problems, no other country in the world can teach us about our unique problems, because there is no other country in the world like us. So we must trench across new land everyday in an effort to make the best of our ever worsening situation.

[blazeofglory]

This is really a big question.

But there is a saying that ignorance of law has no excuse in society. If you are far away from human society and live in the jungle you are right and will not have to take any responsibility.
But as long as you are in society you need to be accountable for your all reckless and careless activities.

[coberst]

This is really a big question.

But there is a saying that ignorance of law has no excuse in society. If you are far away from human society and live in the jungle you are right and will not have to take any responsibility.
But as long as you are in society you need to be accountable for your all reckless and careless activities.

Isn't responsibility like the adage that you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. We can punish a person for not being responsible but we cannot make them accept responsibility. Many parents recognize this truism.

[billl]

Leading a horse to water=punishment, in this analogy?

[NikolaiI]

I am but saddened to see that this is what faith we have in our country, the greatest country in the world. There has to be some people doing something right, the proof is all around. Although this may depend on where you live. Everyone still immigrates to America, why do you think everyone wants to be here? Because of the opportunity, it's just up to the individual to seize it. I am curious as to what evidence you see of us not wanting to understand situations? I am sure people try to understand, but possibly come up with something less right than another idea. We have our own problems, no other country in the world can teach us about our unique problems, because there is no other country in the world like us. So we must trench across new land everyday in an effort to make the best of our ever worsening situation.

Don't be saddened. Coberst represents coberst, no one else.

Our situation is not ever-worsening. The nature of everything is change. Whatever rises must fall. There is suffering but understand, things are getting worse for some, getting better for others. It's the mindset of the people as a whole that truly matters. We should have faith - faith beyond faith. This life is not forever. One day it will end. So we should never have any fear. And as it says in the Christian Bible - there is nothing new under the sun. Take heart and have hope - that is the most important thing. If things are difficult, then rise up to the challenge, and be cheerful always. That is my opinion.

As for Coberst's opinion about the sophistication of Americans - it carries as much weight as a wet paper towel. It's utter nonsense.

[coberst]

Leading a horse to water=punishment, in this analogy?

No, I am just saying that responsibility is something that a person must accept, it cannot be forced. We have a degree of free will and if that free will does not choose to be responsible the person will not be responsible. We may judge him or her to be at fault, however, our prisons are full of the irresponsible.

[coberst]

Don't be saddened. Coberst represents coberst, no one else.

Our situation is not ever-worsening. The nature of everything is change. Whatever rises must fall. There is suffering but understand, things are getting worse for some, getting better for others. It's the mindset of the people as a whole that truly matters. We should have faith - faith beyond faith. This life is not forever. One day it will end. So we should never have any fear. And as it says in the Christian Bible - there is nothing new under the sun. Take heart and have hope - that is the most important thing. If things are difficult, then rise up to the challenge, and be cheerful always. That is my opinion.

As for Coberst's opinion about the sophistication of Americans - it carries as much weight as a wet paper towel. It's utter nonsense.

This is an example of what I mean by irresponsibility. We can choose to remain ignorant, in fact I guess that the United States is a good example of the embrace of ignorance because we cannot handle the anxiety induced by our free will.

[NikolaiI]

This is an example of what I mean by irresponsibility. We can choose to remain ignorant, in fact I guess that the United States is a good example of the embrace of ignorance because we cannot handle the anxiety induced by our free will.

Yes, and this would be true, except it's random, baseless, and negative. Therefore not true. That is not what Americans are.