good question Mrs SS!🌈🥑(sunshine and avocados... health to you... haha:)!
I learned to take responsibility, so I own responsibility for being deceived, it is the only thing that makes sense to me now. I used to be the reverse... it's their frault... they are supposed to treat me the way I treat others, isn't everyone fair and kind? lol...
If I allowed it, I own it and learn. That new frame of thinking alone has been a huge help to me. That doesn't mean I let them out of their BS, that's different. It is perfectly legit to call it out, dissasociate, help them get help. People don't see their own flaws.
The other approach, to blame them, is a trap. It means I have expectations of others based upon my beliefs of how people should be (@jennifer_bloom just asked a question on this). It means I'm either projecting onto the world false expectations of reality, I don't trust my own instincts (ignore my gut) or I don't have good judgement at all.
A big part of life I've learned is accepting reality as it is and learning to handle it as best I can. We don't necessarily control what comes our way... some things are out of our hands who we run into, but we have to own how we handle it and what choices we make. That to me is maturity. As our filter improves, our senses improve, we have better chance to draw better and deflect those which are not good for us. Then we don't need to be on guard all the time.
May you have much sunny texan warmth today... because it is as grey as can be where I'm at.
If a tiger eats a gazelle, who's fault is it? What if the gazelle manages to escape, who's fault is it?
It's not really valid to discuss fault when asking about natural phenomena. And scams are a natural result of the human mind coping with reality - we all must constantly scam ourselves into thinking we do not live in a random and indeterminate universe in which the only certainty is death, because we do but dwelling on it would cripple us.
Anger at decievers is really just anger at being deceived with no benefit. It thus is ultimately a just learning experience to prevent it happening again. However, beating their ass is also a perfectly natural phenomenon..
The Deceived. A group of mummies called that because they’ve been deceived by the promises of Ammut the Devourer. The Deceived themselves don’t use that name. They still believe Ammut was telling the truth.
Sorry. This is how I decompress 😊.
Usually the Deceiver. However, if that same Deceiver keeps Deceiving the same one, than the Deceived. Fool Me once, Shame on You; Fool Me Twice, Shame on Me!!
Opinion
35Opinion
I don't care about fault. I consider causal-factors, to help diagnose the horrible situation and avoid future recurrences.
In that framework, a successful deception requires ≥1deciever & ≥1decieved-person. The removal of even 1factor makes a successful deception impossible. You cannot always control the existence of a deceiver in a given location, but when you can control is your own personal gullibility, but improving interpersonal-savviness (and/or assistance from more resistant loved-ones and/or colleagues).
Of course, in the perfect world, deceivers could be eliminated 100% from the face of the Earth. (But, that's not quite possible, legal, and/or 100% morally-unquestionable by 100% of the all people.)
The deceiver, it's not right to wreck someones innocence just because someone wants to act like a jerk. It's like this, is it right for a girl to enjoy jumping rope vs a girl being scared to jump rope at all? Innocence should be preserved it's sad when people take advantage of it :(
The deceiver is at fault because by definition a deception means taking somebody unawares. How can you be to blame for something you have no idea is happening?
But i still think the deceived can learn retrospectively from their own naive desire to believe that led them to be an easy prey. They might then be more astute and observant in future.
Everyone has to start somewhere. And some of us (like me) are just naturally suspicious of most people. IF you're not like me you have to get burned a few times and learn from it (hopefully learn from it). If someone keeps making the same mistakes though i think it's the decieved's fault. You can keep your heart open and still keep your guard relatively up.
Without knowing the proper details & background, judging is narrow minded.
I wouldn't say its ever the deceived's fault unless they supported somebody who did wrong - I believe God protects you from sinning through errors in evaluating things if you are living properly
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
I think its the deceived's fault for being gullible and not cautious enough. But sometimes we choose to believe what we want to believe even if there are things in the situation that should cast doubt. However the deceiver is still morally wrong
I would say the deceived if we live in a society where its ok to kill people. And he/she didn’t kill the deceiver after his deception . But as we live in society were violence is illegal then of course the deceiver is at fault. Allow me to kill deceivers and there will be none of them left in no time
The deceiver always is more to blame. The deceived feels foolish for trusting to begin with, but they usually learn from that experience. The deceiver just learns how to be better at deception.
It's the deceiver's fault. If you're always paranoid of someone else then you'll never be able to to trust them and never have a good relationship. That's why you should give the other person the benefit of the doubt. And that's why them taking advantage of that benefit of the doubt makes them a piece of shit that needs to be called out and publicly exposed.
1st time around the deceiver.
2nd time around assuming it's the same deceiver then the person who got deceived is at fault.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
i blame both. i should have known better but it has happened a few times
Always the deceiver. If what they intended to do was good and just and fair to the other person it wouldn’t be necessary to deceive them.
Without a deceiver their can not be a deceived but without a deceived there can still be a deceiver. So I'd say the deceiver is at fault.
deceiver. there's nothing wrong with trusting people.
Always blame the person that commits the crime not the person that falls victim to it..
Usely the deceiver depending on the situation if ifs a ponzy scheme then some people should of been smarter about it
What type of fault is at stake here? Deception is obviously wrong But belief cannot be forced upon anyone
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions