Should we be judged by our intention or act?
Are our actions more representitive of who we are or is it our intention?
Is the good that comes out of a bad action still good, or vice versa?
I appreciate every response to this and hope this question was to your taste.
:)
Intention.
Side Score: 11
|
 |
Act.
Side Score: 11
|
|
|
|
|
I am a bit on the fence here and may change sides if someone has a decent enough argument here. Actions can hide intent. For instance someone who donates money on a regular basis could do so to look good or to help people. If our only choices (per this debate) are to judge someone on their intent or actions I would say intent as actions can have many intentions. Of course now the hard part is to discern intention through other factors. Side: Intention.
I'm kind of in the middle too, but someone could intend to lose weight and never actually get around to doing it. They'd likely be labeled as lazy. Where as if that person were to take action and lose the weight, they'd probably be referred to as diligent or hard-working. Side: Intention.
....testing this out. This debate seems to be bugged for me, no arguments are currently showing up but it has a score and I posted here before.... No need to respond to this as it is on the other side of the debate too. (I will erase if the glitch fixes as not to double count. Side: Intention.
Ultimately it relies on both intention and the act to know how one should be judged Agreed, it is difficult to view these concepts apart from each other. Intent leads to action. You can use action to make a judgment on intention. The actions inform the intent...are we judging the action though or the intent? In a murder case they are looking for the intent to kill. If there is no intent, it is manslaughter. I will review the evidence and see if forensics can tell me that the gun was fired in some way that suggested restraint, Here you are looking to prove restraint was used with intent to restrain. Actions can hide intent purposefully or accidentally. "Your honor, he was shot in the hip the shooter was showing restraint." In reality, the shooter could just be a bad shot and meant to kill him with a chest shot. The fact we are using actions to deduce intent shows we are judging intent. Side: Intention.
1
point
i think we should all acknowledge the fact that nobody can show 100% of their intention through action within the first try. if we were to be judged by our actions, wont it be too cruel for someone to re-carry out their intention through different form of action? intention reflects the true motive and the thoughts of the person, actions can always be manipulated in different forms. Side: Intention.
0
points
0
points
|
2
points
This reminds me of an R&B;song that I found to be hypocritical, Let it go, by Keisha Cole. The chorus says "it aint where he's at, it's where he wants to be" yet I'm almost certain that if he's cheating but feels regret, the only thing that will be mentioned when divorcing him is the fact that he cheated, with no regards to the potential that he wanted to stay with the woman he cheated on. As for my own opinion, I find intentions to be too jaded, and easily concealed. Do you let a bank robber off with minor charges because he intended to use the money for charity? Will the victim of a shooting be any less shot, because you intended to miss, but wanted to make it look like you were shooting him? Let it go
Side: Act.
Because something is hard to figure out doesn't mean you take things at face value. If I wear a mask you don't take me for what the mask represents because finding out who I am under is hard. I find intentions to be too jaded, and easily concealed. Intentions can be hidden through action. It is best to find other clues as to intention. Will the victim of a shooting be any less shot, because you intended to miss, but wanted to make it look like you were shooting him? Self defense would go out the window with this reasoning. "I shot him in self defense!" "your intentions don't matter you shot him" You would use other clues to deduce if the intent of the shooting was self defense and not just say a person was shot go to jail/death penalty. Side: Intention.
What you say is true, but the way intentions can be concealed, and falsified must also be taken into consideration. Ultimately it relies on both intention and the act to know how one should be judged, I have to stick to the side that acts are more important because I can always be sure of an act. As a judge, viewing a case of a self defense shooting, I will review the evidence and see if forensics can tell me that the gun was fired in some way that suggested restraint, indicating self defense or whatever, but I'll till be keeping in mind the fact that their is a victim, a shooter, and potentially a dead body. Side: Act.
Even if the result of an action were not the original intent, one should still take responsibility for that action. A person should learn to accept that unintentional results may come from any action, regardless of intent. They should make the best decision possible and be willing to accept the fact that it may be the wrong one. If the result does not match the intent, they should accept responsibility and take a different action if the same scenario presents itself again. Side: Act.
1
point
1
point
|
