for example, we can refuse to get into a flame war, although we
cannot help being angry.
I would argue with your second assumption; I do know people who don't get angry when people say nasty things about them, though many, perhaps most, people do. So for the sake of argument I'll accept that most people can't help getting angry.
BUT, they CAN and should control how they respond. Controlling responses is more challenging in 3d, because one may blurt out a response before one's mind has time to engage. But here on SI, it takes intention and effort to respond, a difference you disregarded in your response. The response is not, as in your example, "at the moment of action," but it is an intentional and deliberate response to hit the Response button, type the response, and Submit it, and the longer the response the more thought it requires. A simple "LOL" or "You're nuts" may happen quite quickly, even though it still requires a variety of actions and decisions. But a lengthy response, as many here are, allows plenty of time for thought, and so I think the longer the response the more responsibility shifts to the responder.
Your bear example is, of course, very much off the mark as far as SI activities are concerned. First, it is physical interaction. Second, it is immediate with not opportunity, once you're tangled with the bear, to stop and reflect on each subsequent action and ask "should I really poke my finger in the bear's eye or not?"
Where there is time for reflection, the choice how to respond becomes a free choice, for which the respondent is responsible. That does not remove the responsibility from the first poster for posting something that may have been inappropriate, even perhaps intentionally provocative as some posters here, present company excepted of course, do from time to time. But the responder cannot avoid culpability by saying "he made me." That may have worked in kindergarten, but not here.
As a very specific example, you may have noted some time back that your friend jla used to come here for the sole purpose of making what he clearly intended to be offensive digs at me. He had no interest in constructive discussion (no surprise there), but every single post of his was intended to try to elicit an angry response. But I, being more intellectually mature than he is, did the responsible thing and declined to respond. The first few times it was, I admit, a challenge, but after that it became an amusement to watch him try and try and try and constantly fail. So when I say that a poster here has the ability to decide not to respond to intended provocations, I speak from direct experience and practice. |
