Blame fosters a sense of control?

[TinyBubbles]

You know how people look for someone to blame whenever something seems to go wrong, and often this seems to be counterproductive, if not completely useless in terms of finding a solution to the problem? Well, could it be that the reason we search for someone or something to place the blame on -to identify a particular reason, a particular mechanism that causes a particular action- is because we want to establish (re-establish?) a sense of control? (and therefore increase our perceived sense of freedom?)

If there is someone to blame, that means there's someone responsible for the action occurring in the first place - and a responsible party frequently (not always) means a controllable party - either through coercion or force. Maybe that's why when a direct physical or human cause can't be found, especially for things like diseases and illnesses, that we attribute them to god's doing -it would be god's fault, or god's blessing, depending on how you look at it - and the responsibility would lie with him, and you could influence that sense of responsibility via prayer or other means and therefore re-establish a sense of control.

This probably makes no sense, but I'll throw it out there in hopes it'll reign in a few new thoughts!

 

[IndigoSensor]

Blame is an interesting concept, that I largely keep completely to myself. It is the externalization of blame that causes the problem. In particular when people don't agree on the source of it. Very often I place the blame on the circumstances, and not just one person. If the blame is singulated on one person, then an issue pops up. Because then they feel cornered and either remorse or anger. Blame is one of the core reasons why I want to disregard emotions, because just the slightest hint of emotion involved with a judgement when deciding on a "blame" clouds it quite badly.

Blame indeed does have a purposes though. It helps us figure out what was the causeation of an action. It is ideal to place blame on cirumstances (again what I stated is the first thing I will often try to do, and usually can do it sucessfully). Interestingly some people don't like blame on the cirumstances, they want it on people. Which largely is illogical because that just causes fighting in the majority of cases. Blame is linked to causation, which is further linked to a solution. It's amazing how many people refuse to accept blame when it is placed (even partially) upon them.

 

[Quinlan]

Yup, also blaming someone else can help distance yourself from negative things and mean you can avoid painful self-reflection.

 

[IndigoSensor]

Yup, also blaming someone else can help distance yourself from negative things and mean you can avoid painful self-reflection.

which is why it is so tempting to do in unwarrented cases.

 

[AUM]

I think there's a psychological concept for this known as the locus of control. If you have an internal locus of control, you tend to blame yourself for problems even if they were outside of your control. On the other hand, if you have an external locust of control, you tend to blame problems to outside influences such as bad luck or on other people.

Weirdly enough, people with a high external locus of control tend to be more happy individuals as opposed to people with internal. Of course this is a correlation, so there's no way of knowing if blaming others is directly affected by it.

 

[894tt3h9]

I feel that blame is completely unnecessary. Life happens. Things happen. People happen. Placing blame does not change what is. It points a finger and in the end I don't feel it solves anything. I don't feel that blaming something or something will truly help people to move on from what IS. I used to heavily blame other people for fear of having to deal with the fact that perhaps it was my own perceptions, reactions or actions to things that were causing my particular circumstance. We have a choice to accept what's happening in our lives, or continuously resist and pass the buck so as to avoid responsibility.

I do think there's an element of control here. I think more often than not people like to be in control of things, but they don't want to be responsible for things. I think it's fairly clear when something or someone is at fault, but when something happens to you as caused by someone else, don't forget that they too are having this thing happen to them as well.

In my head what I'm writing makes perfect logical sense, but I'm exhausted so it may not be translating into words.

 

[Quinlan]

It made me think of "The Cove" the other day, where the Japanese government tried to blame the lack of fish on the whales, the whales! No it wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that you've raped, pillaged and eaten everything not only in your own seas but in oceans all around the world, of course it's the whale's fault.

 

[Inquisitive]

Makes perfect sense...

Cause and effect is a pretty observable law. So I think it

 

[slant]

You know how people look for someone to blame whenever something seems to go wrong, and often this seems to be counterproductive, if not completely useless in terms of finding a solution to the problem? Well, could it be that the reason we search for someone or something to place the blame on -to identify a particular reason, a particular mechanism that causes a particular action- is because we want to establish (re-establish?) a sense of control? (and therefore increase our perceived sense of freedom?)

If there is someone to blame, that means there's someone responsible for the action occurring in the first place - and a responsible party frequently (not always) means a controllable party - either through coercion or force. Maybe that's why when a direct physical or human cause can't be found, especially for things like diseases and illnesses, that we attribute them to god's doing -it would be god's fault, or god's blessing, depending on how you look at it - and the responsibility would lie with him, and you could influence that sense of responsibility via prayer or other means and therefore re-establish a sense of control.

This probably makes no sense, but I'll throw it out there in hopes it'll reign in a few new thoughts!

In one of my college study essentials book there is article like 'love your problems' and it basically tells you that with each problem try to take responsibility in it even if you have none and celebrate your mistakes. Um, anyway, I thought it was a stupid concept to be teaching because in certain situations you don't have any responsibility in a situation and working with people who have been sexually and physically abused the idea of taking responsibility for problems that have nothing to do with you [which is specified is what you should do] encourages a sort of self-harm inflicting attitude. Taking responsibility, blame, or credit for something makes a person feel in control because they feel like they had a part in making something happen, therefore they are not the victim.

I feel this is really unhealthy.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Finding the cause of problems is important if you want to solve/prevent them. I suspect that finding a negative/unwanted cause is virtually instinctual in us - so that if the real cause is not found (mis-information, for example), many will simply start trying to blame someone in order to satisfy a need for closure.

 

[Detective Conan]

Really, I think blame is a useless tool, especially when it's directed at yourself. It doesn't help anyone (in most cases; blaming someone for a crime might actually be productive) and usually ends up in bruised feelings. What's odd is the people who blame themselves for something they had no control over (basically what slant said) and that's where blame really shows how useless it is.

 

[Billy]

Blame is only useful in that it points to the true guilty party so that they can be granted the repercussions of their actions. A car accident for example needs someone at fault to determine who will pay for it. Or a trial for a murderer, the accused is blamed for a crime that must be punished by our own laws. Also a murderer shouldnt be allowed into public.

Blame also works in that it can get the lesson to the right person. If we never have to accept blame for a fuck up, how can we learn from our mistakes?

Blame only becomes a problem when its used to of course less then noble reasoning. But then, thats the case for things isnt it?

 

[Trifoilum]

Blaming establishes a sense of control, but :
a) Is that for a good cause? (say; denial, for instance)
b) Would that make them better? (say, self-blame. Would putting blame on oneself gives control, or strips themselves of their own control on themselves?)

 

[slant]

I have no idea what I was talking about 12 years ago, damn have a changed.

But I revive this thread from the dead because I was about to make a thread asking why "sociopaths are to blame for the world's problems" is a real argument that many people seem to have and this thread popped up and GOD is it what I have been looking for! I think I was even driving at this phenomenon in my conspiracy theorists thread. This is the key.

I often see this on law and order SVU episodes to a funny degree where if the person who did the crime is dead or something they always find a way to blame a Dr for giving them meds that made them suicidal or something. Basically to feel the situation is "resolved" they hunt and hunt and hunt for somebody to blame.

I'm really annoyed by this mindset even though I most certainly do it myself. A reason is different than blame and if we could just shift to that type of thinking it would probably be more constructive, or at least, I like it better.

Blame also tends to devolve into these weird "should" statements, like "everyone SHOULD do this" or "nobody SHOULD go through that", and I find that it actually almost drives me ballistic to hear people talk that way. I never used to have this issue but lately this really, really, really, badly irritates me.

I think because it's a very self centered way of thinking and also simplified. People refuse to accept that most of the time there actually isn't a person or thing to blame but a myriad of factors and you can fixate on one as much as you'd like but that doesn't actually change reality- it just means you only focus on a very tiny part of reality.

Humans don't have computer power processing so certainly we don't have to time nor motivation to consider all factors. This type of thinking is for efficiency, surely.

The self centered aspect is when somebody is being victimized by someone or something via blame. Instead of benefit of doubt or admitting that due to the world not being perfect, factors will line up that result in unfavorable outcomes, some folks always have a narrative of what the reason is and it's always super easy to follow and streamlined, deducting all nuance and potentially contradictory information. Classic human reasoning there. I'm sure there is some evolutionary purpose for it and a benefit. But it's also annoying as hell.

 

[Matty]

Blame is strange. A small fault can result in a large problem. For example, someone might accidentally change lanes, inadvertently cutting someone off, causing a multi vehicle crash.

The fault is minor, but the effect is major. Blaming the inattentive driver is akin to finding who is liable for the bigger problem. It's a strange way of attributing effects to past actions, like blaming Christopher Columbus for pollution in Los Angeles.