I am now addressing a behaviour so prevalent that many people take it for granted. Hang on, as this is not an easy argument to make.
The behaviour is as follows. People judge someone on what is in his character and hold him responsible for it. Meanwhile they deny him the right to change his character. Thus, once a sociopath always a sociopath; once a narcissist always a narcissist; and once an abuser always an abuser. This of course is completely irrational. If character is the person’s responsibility then it is up to him to change it; and if he cannot change his character then it is not his responsibility.
So we get green light for abusive attitudes and behaviour. The claim being made about some people is that they are bad and can only be bad. I know for a fact that this is incorrect. I went from someone whom most people saw as a bad person to someone whom most people see as a good one. I got there the way anyone gets anywhere: by putting my mind to it.
But according to some people this is impossible. Any attempt to improve oneself is seen as trying to be something you’re not. They have decided that they have you pegged for life. They have defined you. According to them you cannot be anything else.
This behaviour must be confronted. Once again, it is completely irrational. If someone’s character is his responsibility then it is his to change; and if it’s not then it’s not his responsibility.
Martin Luther King said that he dreamed of a world in which people are judged not on the colour of their skin but on the contents of their character. The question to ask is, Is the character inborn or is it a matter of choice? If it is inborn, then judging people on it is just as wrong as judging people on the colour of their skin. And if it is a choice, then, once again, it is up to them to do with it what they wish.
The basic question to ask here is this. Is character a choice? If it is, then it is up to the people to formulate it as they desire regardless of how people in their past see them. And they are not allowed to do so, then it is not a choice.
Instead we see people formulating their view of what they think to be someone’s character and deciding that that is all that they are and that is all that they can be. They think that that is the real you and anything else is trying to be something you’re not. So for example there was a situation where my former wife's ex was aggravating her and saying, “here is the real Mel.” I responded with, “I see the real Mel, and she is wonderful.” He decided that he knew her, and that she was bad and could only be bad. I did not share that view.
This behaviour, once again, is exceptionally prevalent. That makes all the greater reason to confront it. Many lives are lost to this kind of thing. People are kept in bad situations and bad self-view. They are prevented the right to grow, the right to improve and the right to pursue a better way of life.
We see a lot of this in personality psychology. This behaviour though is much older than personality psychology. It is very prevalent, for example, among Christian conservatives. These people would crucify you if they found in you character they don’t like. However Christian conservatives also believe in free will, and they believe in forgiveness of sins. If they see self-improvement, they recognize it.
So it is important to define the issues correctly. Is character a choice, or is it not a choice? If it is, then it’s up to the people to alter. And if it is not up to people to alter, then it is not a choice.