4 ms·

If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? Even more broadly, every po

by nickff 2y ago

If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? Even more broadly, every police chief in every large city, along with all military officers, most mayors, governors, and premiers would also be 'natural targets'. This seems a bit drastic to me, is it your view?

JKCalhoun 2y ago
> If your definition of responsibility is so broad His/her definition seems to be narrower than yours — namely profit over lives.
- zdragnar 2y ago
  I am unaware of any heads of government who are not offered salaries above a minimum wage. Further, having such connections gets you invited to the upper crust society events and networking connections. Their direct role in the deaths of others is usually more concrete than that of any CEO.
giraffe_lady 2y ago
This is my view for sure. Every one of those examples is responsible for more deaths than an above average serial killer, they just do it through some degree of abstraction and distance that for some reason means it doesn't count. I disagree, it still counts.
itsanaccount 2y ago
I think in philosophy there's something to be said for the difference between action and lack of action when it comes to culpability. Is a surgeon responsible for not being good enough to save a persons life? No, I don't think so. Is a surgeon responsible for not being sober for a planned surgery? In our society, yes. I think a lot of responsibility is determined by mens rea, and when you run a health insurance company you have good numbers for exactly how many lives you're going to effect when denying coverage.
- nickff 2y ago
  You think this CEO had more 'mens rea' than a city police chief (or the other examples I listed)? The police chief is literally responsible for purchasing guns, distributing them to officers, and telling the latter to use the former to coerce people!
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- refulgentis 2y ago
  if you're saying they actively decide denial rates at management level to hit profit targets, I don't buy it. He has much closer culpability to the CEO of the company that sells me cigarettes than the guy who murdered my grandma. The world is a fallen place. I thought the example up thread re: not being an animal trapper was a Jonathan Swift-esque send up of the whole idea though, so I might be missing a screw or two.
  - motorest 2y ago
    > if you're saying they actively decide denial rates at management level to hit profit targets, I don't buy it. To believe in that, first you need to believe that somehow any executive of a company has no control over the company, does not have a duty to make certain things are done a certain way, nor is accountable for how the company is managed.
    - refulgentis 2y ago
      > To believe in that, first you need to believe... Nah, that's not true.
drewcoo 2y ago
> If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? Chomsky would say "put to death, not assassinated." https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/
aleph_minus_one 2y ago
> If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? I don't agree to the radical formulation "every Head of Government for every country is deserving of assassination", but I do believe that the weaker statement "for most Heads of Government of most country, there exist quite some people (even among the citizens) who would like them them to be dead" is very plausible.

by nickff 2y ago

JKCalhoun 2y ago

> If your definition of responsibility is so broad His/her definition seems to be narrower than yours — namely profit over lives.

zdragnar 2y ago
I am unaware of any heads of government who are not offered salaries above a minimum wage. Further, having such connections gets you invited to the upper crust society events and networking connections. Their direct role in the deaths of others is usually more concrete than that of any CEO.

giraffe_lady 2y ago

This is my view for sure. Every one of those examples is responsible for more deaths than an above average serial killer, they just do it through some degree of abstraction and distance that for some reason means it doesn't count. I disagree, it still counts.

itsanaccount 2y ago

I think in philosophy there's something to be said for the difference between action and lack of action when it comes to culpability. Is a surgeon responsible for not being good enough to save a persons life? No, I don't think so. Is a surgeon responsible for not being sober for a planned surgery? In our society, yes. I think a lot of responsibility is determined by mens rea, and when you run a health insurance company you have good numbers for exactly how many lives you're going to effect when denying coverage.

nickff 2y ago
You think this CEO had more 'mens rea' than a city police chief (or the other examples I listed)? The police chief is literally responsible for purchasing guns, distributing them to officers, and telling the latter to use the former to coerce people!
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
refulgentis 2y ago
if you're saying they actively decide denial rates at management level to hit profit targets, I don't buy it. He has much closer culpability to the CEO of the company that sells me cigarettes than the guy who murdered my grandma. The world is a fallen place. I thought the example up thread re: not being an animal trapper was a Jonathan Swift-esque send up of the whole idea though, so I might be missing a screw or two.
- motorest 2y ago
  > if you're saying they actively decide denial rates at management level to hit profit targets, I don't buy it. To believe in that, first you need to believe that somehow any executive of a company has no control over the company, does not have a duty to make certain things are done a certain way, nor is accountable for how the company is managed.
  - refulgentis 2y ago
    > To believe in that, first you need to believe... Nah, that's not true.

drewcoo 2y ago

> If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? Chomsky would say "put to death, not assassinated." https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/

aleph_minus_one 2y ago

> If your definition of responsibility is so broad, wouldn't every Head of Government for every country be deserving of assassination? I don't agree to the radical formulation "every Head of Government for every country is deserving of assassination", but I do believe that the weaker statement "for most Heads of Government of most country, there exist quite some people (even among the citizens) who would like them them to be dead" is very plausible.