Blame by Consciousness

If an individual is more conscious, does that make them more probable to be fairly blamed, in general?

I will consider “blame” to be basically; held accountable and responsible, with a negative connotation implying that the individual (that is being blamed) should have taken an alternate action.

For blame to be considered fair, it seems logical that it should only be for a negative outcome resulting from the individuals actions, of which they were aware. If being more conscious is being more aware and understanding of results, then it seems to follow that an individual would be more aware of the resulting effects of their actions, and more to blame.

If this is true, does it mean that the likeliness and degree of blame, increase proportionate to conscious awareness? Does that mean that the more somebody learns, understands, and comprehends of their environment and actions within, the more likely they are to be at fault and blame for something, and to a higher the degree of blame?

If you agree that conscious awareness coincides with comprehending, then it does seem to be the case. It seems fair to only blame an individual for that which they are aware of, and capable of avoiding. Alternatively, if an individual has no knowledge of the result of their actions, it seems fair that they should not be blamed. Take animals for eg. They have very little knowledge or awareness of their ability to cause alternate effects. A deer has no awareness that if it walks on a highway, it is likely to cause a traffic accident, so that deer should not be blamed. Or if a person commits a crime without mental awareness of their actions, by law it is often considered insanity, and they are usually not blamed.

So with no awareness, there should be no blame, and with relevant awareness, there should be blame. But what is the relevant and required awareness? If someone absolutely knows their actions will result in the negative outcome, then sure, it seems fair that they are to blame. But does anybody know anything absolutely? If knowing something is considered to be that person's belief of estimated probability of an occurrence taking place, then it seems that rationally, people would never estimate that a probability is 100%. As long as there is even the smallest chance of an alternate outcome (eg. life is a simulation, and laws of physics might stop functioning), then rationally, someone should not know anything for certain.

So what % estimate of someone is required for blame? If someone does something intentionally, it seems to mean that they correctly estimated the resulting outcome of their actions. The minimum % estimate would then seem to be 50, for someone to do something intentionally. It seems fair to blame someone for doing something intentionally. But should someone be blamed more, if they had a higher (than 50%) estimate that their actions would cause a negative result? If “blame’ is; holding accountable, with the implication that the individual should have taken an alternate action, then perhaps their estimate of outcome should be proportionate to blame of them. If the individual has a higher estimate that their action will result in the negative, then it can be assumed that rationally they should have been less likely to take that action.

Does this apply for unintentional results of an action? I’ll consider an unintentional result, to be with an estimate of less than 50%, by the individual, for that outcome. For eg, if someone estimates a 10% that they will kill a pedestrian unintentionally, by street racing, are they to blame, if it does happen? The same proportion of blame to estimate of the blamee, seems to be applicable. The lower someone’s estimate of an outcome, the less they should be accountable for taking that action, rather than another. Perhaps that street racer should be to blame, equivalent to their estimate. So 10% to blame.

If blame is relative to the estimate, by the individual, of the result of their actions, how does this tie into conscious awareness? Without conscious awareness of the future and cause and effect of actions, no estimate can even be made, so still no blame. With some conscious awareness of cause and effect of actions, comes the ability to estimate, and therein the potential for blame. With a higher degree of conscious awareness, comes more ability to predict outcomes of actions, with more awareness of more circumstances, so more probability of blamable circumstances. With more information learned, and more concepts comprehended, comes more awareness of potential effects of personal actions. This also means more potential circumstances to estimate the result of actions, and the more probable it is to be in a situation, which is blamable.

But with more understanding of cause and effect, comes more accurate estimates. If more accurate estimates are made, the individual would still be more to blame, with a higher estimate of the negative outcome, but their estimates are more likely to be correct (with higher accuracy). If estimates are more likely to be correct, then the negative results can more effectively be avoided.

So, fair blame seems to require a minimum comprehension by the individual, of the cause and effect of their actions, as well as awareness of a potential alternate outcome, resulting from their actions. If an individual is capable of predicting the effect of potential alternate actions that they are able to take, then their estimate of the outcome resulting as it does, seems to be proportionate to their blamability. The higher their estimate, the more responsible they are for not taking the alternate action. The more consciously aware an individual is, the more circumstances they are likely to be in, where they could be blamed. But also, the more likely they are able to accurately predict and avoid an outcome for which to be blamed.

Blame seems to be proportionate to someone’s estimate of the results of their actions. More conscious awareness allows more situations to make an estimate and potentially be blamable, but also allows more avoidance of a negative and blamable result.