3 ms·
That doesn't make much sense to me. How can you blame someone for a problem they didn't cause?
by ChadNauseam 3mo ago
That doesn't make much sense to me. How can you blame someone for a problem they didn't cause?
- narnarpapadaddy 3mo agoBecause it’s their job to fix it. If they don’t, the axe falls again. Humans often think in terms of deontological ethics. Corporations operate in terms of consequentialist ethics, and the only consequence that matters is that the numbers go up.
- scott_w 3mo agoYou’re mixing “blame” and “accountability.” Sharma isn’t to blame for the problems but she’s now accountable for fixing them.
- narnarpapadaddy 3mo agoNo, I’m not. I’m explicitly differentiating between those two perspectives and which corporations care about. “Blame” doesn’t exist in most corporate vocabularies.
- butlike 3mo agoI still think "blame" works here since we're assigning responsibility to her. The fault or wrong was caused by someone else, perhaps, but she is now responsible for that fault. > Blame: assign responsibility for a fault or wrong.
- scott_w 3mo agoYou’re conflating the fault/wrong and the solution. Sharma is not responsible for the prior decisions but she is responsible for subsequent decisions.
- butlike 3mo agoBecause they decided to be the figurehead and take on that responsibility. It's like a king who takes on their predecessor's war when they assume power. No one looks to the previous king when the current one has all the agency.