Hurm...

[bcholmes]

Is apathy a right? Do we have a right to apathy?

Comments

[erik]

Who cares?


Seriously, though. Apathy is certainly an entitlement in the US. We are granted leave, in fact encouraged, to not care about most things.

Re:

[futabachan.livejournal.com]

Who cares?

Ooo, you beat me to it....

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

Of course. We have a right to feel or not feel anything we like. There are, of course, consequences to apathy when it leads to inaction.

Re:

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

An interesting response. Is apathy a feeling in the same way as happiness is a feeling?

Re:

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

Let me put it to you this way: How on earth would I compel someone else to care about something? Caring is an internal state. In that way, it's enough like a feeling to be about as externally-controllable as one.

(Not being argumentative. This is fascinating.)

[northbard.livejournal.com]

On the one hand, I realize this is meant as a serious questiob. I could get into the philosophical question of the guilt of the stander-by.

Or, I could simply go for the humorous cheap-shot:

Yes, we have a right to apathy...but try and get anyone to the rally. :)

[kalikanzara.livejournal.com]

If it's not a right, it is at the least a long-standing tradition in some parts.

[hellsop.livejournal.com]

There certainly seems to be a unversal right to hold uninformed opinions. I would hope that it's not obligatory to have uninformed opinions, and seemingly too often, a refusal to have an opinion on a matter one is too uninformed to have a wise opinion of is confused with apathy.

I would also argue that one has a right to remain uninformed about any matter provisional upon maintaining a "no opinion" state on the matter in question, but no particular right to remain uninformed on a matter in which one ventures an opinion at all.

[sinboy.livejournal.com]

Do we have a right to apathy?

I supose we could ignore more than is healthy, but nature and the actions of other humans have a way of dealing harshly with that sort of behavior. In that sense, there's no less of a "right" to apathy than there is a "right" to stop eating. But you can always get strapped down and force fed.

I think in some way, our bodies encourage us in certain directions. We have no "right" to escape that.

a right to apathy?

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

mu.

no, seriously. i don't even know which way to look at that question (tried upside down and got "mu" as well).

complete and total apathy would result in death very quickly. i've apparently been there, but somebody found me before i died, so i can't say for sure, just that i hadn't noticed that i was dying, i can't remember any of it because nothing in me cared; i had a total mental breakdown. i'm pretty sure anyone would demand their right to apathy only while not apathetic and from whom would one demand it? and why? apathy results in not being concerned with rights. and why should anyone from whom one might demand it care about somebody who doesn't care and won't do zir part in defining and defending rights?

[wild-irises.livejournal.com]

I think there are distinctions, or at least spectra, to be drawn between deep personal apathy, as pleonastic describes and apathy about a particular topic or area of life. The personal extreme is clearly not about rights per se. The social extreme (perhaps "too apathetic to vote" or "too apathetic to do the dishes in my communal household") seems more apropos to your question to me, which makes me wonder what you were thinking when you asked it.

For things like politics and religion, I do believe apathy is a right, and also a feeling. For things like dishes and laundry, I think it's a sort of right, but one that allows housemates the right to say, "Then you can't live here any more." (much qualification could ensue) The deep personal apathy simply makes me sad.

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

I think that we have a right to selective apathy. I think that it's entirely fair that each individual should choose their battles, and that being aware that something is a problem does not constitute a responsibility to address it. I would prefer if people had some cause that they believed enough in to take some action on, but even that is a preference rather than a compulsion. However, I really respect people who act on any causes at all, and don't in any way feel that they need to act on them all, or more importantly, act on the ones that I find important myself.

what a question

[medhba.livejournal.com]

My brain has turned itself inside out.
Fine friend you are.
( :