Ask Lemmy

no, because you cannot hold one person accountable for the actions of a different person unless they directly enabled it.

it is a valid view.

but i do not support it.

imo, anything that uses absolutes tends to get out of reasonable bounds. no innocents in Gaza is really hard to prove.

It's an extreme perspective and an oversimplification. So necessarily wrong if you state it this way... Neither do all people in Israel seem to support this, nor is "innocent" any attribute that fits the purpose. Technically like a newborn baby should be pretty much innocent. An adult may not, even if it's just an act of omission. But it's not really a philosophical question in this case, is it? And it's not even what this is about. So I'd say that sentence is immediately wrong on technicalities.

It can be valid, it surely doesn't apply to Gaza.

We are "all" guilty because we knowingly pollute, for example, and that kills people. And we buy products and that finance Israel bombs. And we fight for survival and strangle our jailer that just landed that job to feed his family and never got quality education to choose a different career.

I am more of the idea that there are no truly guilty in a strict sense. We as a society share the responsibility to handle the now extended knowledge we have and we are basically not even trying.

The idea of free will is unfalsifiable. So far, there is no evidence that there is anything causing conscious beyond, physical, chemical interactions. This means, that most likely, humans do not have free will. Every action, every thought, is caused by some chemical, or physical thing, and is ultimately predetermined.

The idea of "guilt" is born out of the idea that humans have free will, and are therefore culpable for "bad" or "immoral" actions. But humans do not have free will. Punishing a "guilty" person, is actually just inflicting suffering on the qualia, or the conscious experience of someone, for circumstances completely out of anyone's control, including themselves.

I believe that all people are innocent. Every act of violence should be evaluated as if it was being done against an innocent person. The only difference between a killer and a saint is that of brain chemistry.

As for Israel specifically, since that is a different question than the nature of innocent, here is my reply:

• Israel funded and supported Hamas to undermine Palestinian authority
• Israel had extensive knowledge on Hamas' capabilities beforehand, but "accidentally" ignored warning signs

I see a few people blaming Hamas for Oct 7th. I disagree. When a dog bites someone, do you blame the dog or the owner?

The way I see it, the only truly innocent people are those who sincerely do not know right from wrong, and they're mostly children. The rest of us are each and all responsible for our choices and actions.

This one is just projection. To believe this statement denies there are plenty of people who are innocent on both sides. We are not talking about those people.

We are talking about the people who hate the other side on both sides, but once again we aren't talking about both sides here. One side has made the statement popular to dehumanize the other side.

This is what we are talking about. You can't agree with this statement because it is used as an excuse to kill people. Regardless if the statement has truth to it it is in essence propaganda used to manipulate people.