Thread: reason over action

Now, splitting off from my last thread “Is it possible to know, without a doubt, what is good and what is evil?” is it better to judge one according to actions or reasons?
Actions are something everyone can see, and is something everyone is quick to judge. But what about the persons reasons for committing the action? Reasons are not always apparent but surely this is more important.
As I said in my last thread “Is one who steals to feed their family really evil?”
Some have asked me, “well what if they lie about their reason?”
Of course, since reasons are something that lies within a person, we cannot always discern what they truly are.
This is a fault in the process or the principle of reason over action, but non-the-less it is a principle I believe in. what are your thoughts?

It's better not to judge one at all.

Even if you are there and you see an event, when you recount it, your version will differ from what the guy beside you saw. That is the nature of the beast. History is written by the victors. That carries to any event, people write/see their own version from their own perspective, rarely are in possession of relevant background and cannot possibly determine motivation.

All that obvious claptrap aside, it cannot be assumed when a moral or ethical question arises in life, the person recognises that is what it is. Often things just happen and people just react on the spot without having time to think or consider. Their actions are not premeditated or even in character. If the same thing happened again or in slightly different circumstances, they might react a completely different way. Sometimes environment dictates actions.

In the case of murder or the criminal, a line has been drawn and rules have been constructed to deal with those most serious of actions because that type of act is dangerous to society and needs to be restricted for the good of all, even then the Law can be an ass but it is our best guess and all we have.

That apart, don't bother judging people. You can be sure you have no idea why they did what they did and you are unqualified to judge them.

that has nothing to do with what i am talking about. if it was def that you knew the motivation, would you condemn the man who stole to feed his family or the man who stole to satisfy his greed? both commited the same crime, but the action is redeemed by the reason. no?

Originally Posted by Tribearer_Eko

that has nothing to do with what i am talking about. if it was def that you knew the motivation, would you condemn the man who stole to feed his family or the man who stole to satisfy his greed? both commited the same crime, but the action is redeemed by the reason. no?

Your opinion seems to be fixed. Why are you bothering to seek opinion from others?

It has everything to do with what you're asking in both threads. I wouldn't condemn any man. People have their reasons for doing what they do.

Originally Posted by Tribearer_Eko

that has nothing to do with what i am talking about. if it was def that you knew the motivation, would you condemn the man who stole to feed his family or the man who stole to satisfy his greed? both commited the same crime, but the action is redeemed by the reason. no?

It is called mitigating circumstances, though I hesitate to use that word ever again on the forum as the last time I did someone attacked me over and over on my use of the word.

For every action there is an equal reaction. But there doesn't need to be a reason for it.

Life is full of judgment. Reason is a rare character trait these days.

Originally Posted by Trinnity

Life is full of judgment. Reason is a rare character trait these days.

On that I totally agree with you. Just look at what is happening around the world today.