If there were no consequences or accountability

[KiaKaha]

Do you think people would behave themselves?
I don't think they would. I think a lot of people would indulge their darkest fantasies if they could get away with it. You can see it all the time, particularly on the internet - where people behave in such a way that they wouldnt do so in real life because there is less repercussion. The only reason why people dont is because they prohibited by social norms, a desire for acceptance and belonging (to fit in - no one likes being a social pariah)

....and of course the law.

Which brings me to the question of morality. Where does it come from? What makes people realize the difference between right and wrong? Why do hold our tounge when really what we truly want to do is tell people what we really think. Do people let things go for the sake of civility to keep the peace? Would it still be the same if the norm was to brutally honest...? Do people keep things on the inside - for fear of judgement from others?

I know I do.

Thoughts?

 

[MikeyC]

I don't think people would. I probably even wouldn't.

 

[Nathália]

I have so much anxiety, I don't think so. Risky behaviors isn't worth risking my life over. People would get to do what they want, but life is not a video game. Seriously, I would be up a tree somewhere if that happened. I do think there are some limits that I put on myself because I'm shy and care about reputation and I think many people do.

 

[KiaKaha]

Yeah. I would probably behave "questionably" if I knew I wasnt going to get in trouble (and I have before - so if there werent any consequences I no doubt probably would, especially if society was that way to begin with) - I think reputation is an interesting subject - because everybody cares about how they come across to others, and how much credibility they have.

Once ones reputation is ruined, its very very hard to reclaim - kind of related to trust I suppose. Which I also wonder about... why is it so hard to regain trust once its lost?

But I think what I am trying to get at is - how do we know the difference between whats right and whats wrong? How do we know what kind of behaviour is acceptable and what isnt?

 

[Srijita52]

^well I'm not sure if I'll make sense here, I won't act in a way that doesn't seem 'right' to me. I might risk loosing reputation but I can't risk loosing my own respect. Then again I don't have a wonderful reputation among people around me in the first place, so I doubt if I've anything to loose anyway.

 

[1BlackSheep]

I'm certainly no saint, but I feel like if I do something wrong it will come back to bite me in the butt and give me future bad karma, so this kind of keeps me in check!

 

[MsBuzzkillington]

We learn what is right and wrong. What is considered right and wrong is relative to the culture you are in.

If nothing mattered, then there would be no judgement... no one would have reputation to keep. There would be no credibility. There would be no lack of trust, no breaking of trust. There would be nothing to respect or disrespect yourself over. I mean how far into the "no consequences" area are you thinking?

 

[Ashiene]

People are naturally wild, untamed animals like feral cats you see in the forest. The only thing really that keeps us in check is the law. Much of morality itself is a sense of justice ingrained in us by society and law. All of us have the natural tendency to not create violence, but that is only when one knows that being communal is beneficial to one's survival. If there is anarchy and no more law or the justice system to keep any of us in check, people will return to their basest, primal selves and think only of the need to self-preserve. They may work together with others in very tiny groups that are linked together more because they share common goals than because they truly care about each other. We have seen this in many historical records where the only thing that keeps a population in check is by the creation of a law and justice system as well as religion which acts another factor of population control.

 

[bcsr]

I'd behave in the same way as I do now. I've said it before, I think humans have a moral obligation to each other that transcends religion and law. You should be a good person because it's the right thing to do, not for fear of punishment. I don't want to sound too cliche' but morality is simple, do to others as you'd have them do to you. Some things are universal.

I truly despise people who seek to better themselves at the expense of others. I've always been this way, and it's one of the primary drives I have to be a peace officer.

 

[Pyrophosphate]

People naturally behave in a way that is conducive to a complex society. Otherwise, we wouldn't have complex society to begin with. What stops people from raping and pillaging the neighboring villages isn't them stopping to remember that they'll go to jail if they do, it's generally that they just don't want to do it.

 

[KiaKaha]

Yeah, it has to come from somewhere though, there has to be a reason for it.
I think it partly comes from sheer common sense. I think if you went back far enough people would begin to realize that no one can be completely self sufficient... well all need one another to survive - no one can do everything themselves, especially now.

So I think morality in it's most basic form stems from the fact that in order to survive ourselves, we need to co operate with others, because if we didn't then we as individuals would not get very far.

I mean how far would civilization get if we all indulged in our most primal urges with no sense of self control? We probably wouldnt have even got off the ground.

But I still wonder - would people behave themselves (even now) if they knew they wouldnt get caught. I guess it's not just a question of morality, but a question of integrity and of having a social conscience.

 

[MsBuzzkillington]

Common sense is not... common. Common sense is also relative.

I was thinking how we need each other to survive. You said it much better than I could have though. If we were like rampant animals and tried to survive on our own, it wouldn't go well. We wouldn't survive for very long. Things work much better if we live in some kind of morally structured society.

I don't think we are these wild animals with these crazy "primal urges" that we have trouble controlling. I definitely think if people went nuts, we wouldn't survive very long at all. Or maybe the strongest and the fittest would survive, maybe we would get back to the natural order of things where only the strong survive. That is probably going off into another discussion though.

I think everyone has a line. I mean to be honest I didn't ALWAYS pick up my dog's poop when I walked him. If he was really late at night and it was just a tiny thing of poop I wouldn't put it up. If no one was watching, I wouldn't pick it up. A lot of people seem to be the same way. A lot of people download things illegally from the internet. That is stealing but they have very little chance of getting caught, so they still do it. A lot of people cheat when they think they won't get caught. A lot of people speed too, especially on long open high ways. A lot of people break the law all the time. If there are no consequences that can be seen, people break the law.

But a lot of people wouldn't cross the same lines and I would imagine the majority of people wouldn't kill anyone even if they had zero chance of getting caught. Or they wouldn't rape someone or do other really socially immoral acts.

I would say the only reason for things is because you would look bad in society. No one wants to be "that guy". Most people don't want to go to jail or get arrested. So those are the things that keep us in check. I would imagine a lot more things would get stolen and a lot more poop would get left on the sidewalks if we didn't have consequences. But I would guess it wouldn't get much more serious than that.

 

[KiaKaha]

Common sense is not... common. Common sense is also relative.

I was thinking how we need each other to survive. You said it much better than I could have though. If we were like rampant animals and tried to survive on our own, it wouldn't go well. We wouldn't survive for very long. Things work much better if we live in some kind of morally structured society.

I don't think we are these wild animals with these crazy "primal urges" that we have trouble controlling.

Yes well common sense is relative but I think what you are implying there is a learned cultural social norm. The way that I used the term common sense was from the perspective of instinctual survival - as you mentioned in the next part of your post. We DO need to live in some kind of structured society - and this is why I believe there ARE consequences for our actions. No one can get by on our own. We need each other.

I think things would get pretty bad if we didnt have some kind of authority in place to keep us in check - I mean you can see it first hand where types of urban decay occur.

I think people behave because as mentioned before, no one wants to be ousted from society or to be punished. I just find it interesting - whether or not the desire to do wrong would be there *if* it was possible to get away with it.

 

[Kiwong]

People who act without fear of consequence and accountability of the feelings of others are probably considered pyschopathic?

As a species I think the majority of us are wired to some extent to consider the feelings of others and the consequences of our actions. Some of this is innate, some learnt from childhood.

If I could act without consequence and accountability I would feel bad within myself and would soon tire of it.

 

[Lea]

^well I'm not sure if I'll make sense here, I won't act in a way that doesn't seem 'right' to me. I might risk loosing reputation but I can't risk loosing my own respect. Then again I don't have a wonderful reputation among people around me in the first place, so I doubt if I've anything to loose anyway.

Yeah, same here, I wouldn´t do things I abhor even if nobody was watching me. It is not my nature to like or crave doing bad things. With this I don´t mean for example riding without a ticket or going to public loo without paying if I can , but I hate violence, stealing, lying, cheating etc...

 

[Ashiene]

I'd behave in the same way as I do now. I've said it before, I think humans have a moral obligation to each other that transcends religion and law. You should be a good person because it's the right thing to do, not for fear of punishment. I don't want to sound too cliche' but morality is simple, do to others as you'd have them do to you. Some things are universal.

I truly despise people who seek to better themselves at the expense of others. I've always been this way, and it's one of the primary drives I have to be a peace officer.

^I can't help but always be reminded of the many years I spent being nice to people but ended up being bullied because apparently to many people, niceness equals weakness, submission and ignorance. Then I think of going on a bloody rampage.

 

[WeirdyMcGee]

So--- if right now, at this moment; the entire world were able to do as they wished without any consequences whatsoever... would they? Would I?

Would 'they', generally? Yes. Absolutely. I know they would because they DO even WITH consequences.
I would probably kill myself to keep from being murdered or raped or both-- in any order.
I still have morals-- I don't just do things to keep from people hating me because I don't know any people; I'm a hermit. I am the person I am because I believe it is the only way to be.
I'm terrified of people because I know what they are capable of-- though, really doubt I could be capable of the same things.
I've been in situations with other people and always made a different decision from the rest.

Now; were I to be brought up in a world without consequences from the beginning-- raised by parents and a family of people without consequences; it would be a very different answer, I'm sure.

 

[coyote]

external consequences - law, order, rule, etc. - only go so far in determining human behavior

people act out of their own sense of self-preservation

both in terms of what it takes to survive and in broader terms of preserving their sense of self - their identity

if it is in their interest or part of their self-identity to be "law-abiding" then they will be

but if they are destructive, violent, or predatory by nature, the law won't stop them - they answer to an inner voice that directs them

as we all do

and if we answer to the inner voice of compassion and kindness, that's how we'll be

we don't need legislation to tell us that we should be that way

what we need is someone to treat us with compassion and kindness

if everyone in the world treated their children with nothing but compassion and kindness from the day they were born, then everyone would learn to treat others the same way

but since that doesn't always happen, we must work to educate

and thus the basis for morality

"do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

or

"treat others as you wish to be treated"

 

[chibiXphantom]

I'm actually working on writing about this for either a book or film.
you cant really know what people would do.
what i think is that people would be divided. the people that go crazy and commit crimes just because they can and act wild would probably be separated from those who want to remain peacefull because their internal sense of morality.
i think people naturally want order, a sense of justice, and rules for themselves. thats why we developed laws and government to begin with.
animals arent naturally wild, crazy, and bloodthirsty. think of lions. they are wild animals and yet they have their own kind of structure within their prides. wolf packs are similar in their own order they develop.
the people that go psycho and resort to chaos, destruction, and fulfilling these dark fantasies would end up killing eachother and would die out, or those who want order would block them out. eventually, law and order would come back.
people cant function without order

 

[Rembrandt Broam]

Do you think people would behave themselves?
I don't think they would. I think a lot of people would indulge their darkest fantasies if they could get away with it. You can see it all the time, particularly on the internet - where people behave in such a way that they wouldnt do so in real life because there is less repercussion.

Pretty much my thoughts on the matter. Some people would try to carry on behaving decently, while others would behave badly and rationalise it to themselves afterwards, but I think a large number of people would just behave how they pleased. I agree that the internet is a good indicator of how a lot of people would behave if there were no consequences to their actions.