Peter's quote from Civil War

If you don't understand the significance of the phrase "...because nobody else will..." then I can't make you understand it.
Yea you're clearly missing the obvious point I made multiple times, so...
 
Yea you're clearly missing the obvious point I made multiple times, so...

Well, you can clarify if you want. But I think you're just trying to rationalize and justify not doing anything when the shit goes down. Which doesn't make you any worse than the vast, vast majority of people, so you really don't need to rationalize.
 
According to Peter's quote, if you do nothing about the getting beat by 4 dudes, it's somehow your fault that the guy gets hurt/killed lol
Not everybody can take on 4 people, but if your Spider-Man , then yeah you should do something about it. It's all relative.
 
BisexalMMA gave good examples for IRL situations, what you really want? A example with the Green Goblin in it?
On the contrary, it was a terrible example. In the post I quoted, he is talking about situations where I am personally responsible for someone's care (he mentions a kid as an example). That's not what I'm talking about itt
 
Well, you can clarify if you want. But I think you're just trying to rationalize and justify not doing anything when the shit goes down. Which doesn't make you any worse than the vast, vast majority of people, so you really don't need to rationalize.
I dunno how many times I have to focus on the "it happens BECAUSE of you" or the implication that it's your fault for what happens because of indifference for you to get what I'm referring to. This isn't about moral obligation.
 
On the contrary, it was a terrible example. In the post I quoted, he is talking about situations where I am personally responsible for someone's care (he mentions a kid as an example). That's not what I'm talking about itt

You asked what situations involved a duty to intervene. I answered your question. The fact that there aren't many situations doesn't mean it failed to answer to your question.
 
This is not the type of situations we're talking about.


I think it's exaggerated and rather foolish tbh, but I wonder who agreed with it outright. The notion that it's my fault that a homeless person went hungry for the day because I didn't give him a couple bucks when I had the chance is absurd.

Maybe not your personal failure, but certainly societies; and their is a lot of personal responsibility in the situation you described, too, Peter is not talking about that.
 
I dunno how many times I have to focus on the "it happens BECAUSE of you" or the implication that it's your fault for what happens because of indifference for you to get what I'm referring to. This isn't about moral obligation.

Jesus man. Take a chill pill. See my post from what feels like many moons ago where I said that Peter was giving an exaggerated perspective to describe the responsibilities he feels as a superhero.
 
You asked what situations involved a duty to intervene. I answered your question. The fact that there aren't many situations doesn't mean it failed to answer to your question.
I asked the poster IAC to name some situations where I'd be penalized. I guess it's my fault for thinking the situations would be related to the point I was making in the OP
 
Jesus man. Take a chill pill. See my post from what feels like many moons ago where I said that Peter was giving an exaggerated perspective to describe the responsibilities he feels as a superhero.
I already responded to that and then we got sidetracked.
 
Maybe not your personal failure, but certainly societies; and their is a lot of personal responsibility in the situation you described, too, Peter is not talking about that.
Maybe I should just make my own point clear and I'll use superheroes as an example. While it would be nice to help others in trouble, it's in no way your fault if you don't help and something bad happens.

When you say "they happen because of you", you are saying that you are the cause simply because you didn't act as a neutral party.
 
Nice example of the bystander effect. It doesn't really strengthen your side of the matter, however.

I'm still waiting for some good reasoning why someone not acting on a situation suddenly becomes at fault for wherever that situation leads to

You see a child walking in the middle of the street and you keep reading the paper. You could have prevented him from getting hit by that car, but did nothing.


You see a woman getting assaulted by some men, you could call the cops and scream for help, or you could keep walking. Which is the right choice?

You're not Spider-Man so it's okay if you don't take down a crime syndicate or catch a piano before it squishes a old lady, but there are things we can do every day to make life better. It's not an excuse to go with the crowd, that's the problem. If the majority of people did the right thing, there wouldn't be as much opportunity for bad things and bad people to happen.
 
All right. Good luck man, maybe someone else will give you the answers you are hoping for.
Answers? I just wanted to see who agreed with the quote and see why and you confused yourself posting a wiki article and a Die Hard clip that's only loosely related to the topic lol
 
Answers? I just wanted to see who agreed with the quote and see why and you confused yourself posting a wiki article and a Die Hard clip that's only loosely related to the topic lol

Lol.
 
You see a child walking in the middle of the street and you keep reading the paper. You could have prevented him from getting hit by that car, but did nothing.


You see a woman getting assaulted by some men, you could call the cops and scream for help, or you could keep walking. Which is the right choice?

You're not Spider-Man so it's okay if you don't take down a crime syndicate or catch a piano before it squishes a old lady, but there are things we can do every day to make life better. It's not an excuse to go with the crowd, that's the problem. If the majority of people did the right thing, there wouldn't be as much opportunity for bad things and bad people to happen.
Right or wrong choice is not my focus.

The question would be, "if that child or woman gets hurt, did it happen BECAUSE of you?"
 
Maybe I should just make my own point clear and I'll use superheroes as an example. While it would be nice to help others in trouble, it's in no way your fault if you don't help and something bad happens.

When you say "they happen because of you", you are saying that you are the cause simply because you didn't act as a neutral party.

I would say that as soon as you were aware of a problem that you could correct, permanently or just for that moment, then you have, at minimum, a shared responsibility in the outcome of that situation.
 
"When you can do the things that I can, but you don't, and then the bad things happen? They happen because of you."

Does anyone agree with this quote? He's basically saying if something bad happens when you have the ability to stop it, it becomes your fault.

Of course it does. Is this even in question? If you see a man laying unconscious on a railroad track and a train is coming and you watch as the train kills him, are you at fault? The law sure thinks you are and you will catch a manslaughter charge in that instance.
 
Back
Top