Marko Koskinen (email@example.com)
Mon, 05 Mar 2001 12:59:47 -0500
> But I must admit Marko's quote (above) about leaving problem solving to the
> guilty party confuses me greatly. Marko, are you actually proposing that
> when someone has such a problem that they violate someone else's rights, the
> responsibility for solving that problem resides with an outside third party?
No. I'm suggesting that the community takes responsibility as a whole of
the problem and that means that the community provides help if requested
for the person having the problem. In practice this could mean that if
someone violates the common rules, s/he would be given a chance to form
a "problem solving group" that would help the violator to get over the
problem. I'd guess that most of the problems and violations would be so
"small" that they wouldn't need any such group, but the violator could
come up with a solution to the violation him/herself.
This view bases on a systemic view of human consciousness. This means
that human consciousness is in fact an illusion created by aim to reach
a common result in a complex network of human relationships. Human
consciousness is "born" in social interactions. This means that
individuals exist only to reach common result and have no value in
themselves. But the way to reach this common result is via freedom,
cause freedom means the amount of different possibilities to survive.
The greater freedom the greater chance of survival. And because the
system consists of individuals the freedom renders to these individuals
meaning that the more freedom (meaning the amount of possible choices
that don't restrict others freedom) an individual has the more valuable
s/he is to the whole system. This theory consists of the idea that
emotions are a type of reorganization of the organism-environment system
so that positive feelings mean integration and negative feelings mean
And how this all relates to the problem solving process? If all behavior
aims to common result then all problems are also common problems. And I
agree that a problem solving process needs internal motivation, but I
also believe that the process is more effective if it's not done alone.
With this I mean that when there is someone who actively listens to the
one who is talking and thinking about the problem, the process is more
And I don't believe this process should be made mandatory, but I think
people who need such "consultation" help, will seek it out and I don't
see why offering such help would be counterproductive.
PS. The whole articles that I base this thinking can be found from
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:52 EST