Example If a man hit a women in the wrong way. Is that on purpose or mistake

@Peacefulperson I would think any way to strike a woman is the "wrong" way. Unless she's coming at you with murderous intent or something. Is this a serious question or are you just being provocative?

@mordant just trying to if what I believe is realistic. Their a big difference between doing things on purpose and making mistake. But too many people believe in what they do on purpose is a mistake.

@Peacefulperson OK ... I judge actions by their harms or benefits. From society's perspective, morality judges by harms or benefits to society; from the perspective of an ethical code, it judges by harms or benefits to the particular group to which the ethical code applies. Harms and benefits happen no matter what the intent was.

To me, where intent comes in, is in determining consequences. An accidental harm generally means there are fewer sanctions than an intentional one -- provided that the person who caused the harm isn't a repeat offender.

A long time ago I was a safety and compliance officer of a trucking firm. The ironclad principle in that field is that fixed objects don't hit trucks; trucks hit fixed objects. So a driver is ALWAYS at fault in a collision with a fixed object (e.g., overhead sign or canopy or bridge). It is incumbent on the driver to proactively look for such objects and not hit them. Therefore when a driver tried to say it was an accident -- the basic response was, well duh. So what. You still screwed up.

Where intent comes in, is that if a driver INTENTIONALLY runs his vehicle into a fixed object, that is considered willful destruction of property, a firing offense. If he ACCIDENTALLY runs his vehicle into a fixed object, that's X points on his driving record for a period of time, and typically if it happens 3 times in a set period period (perhaps 3 years) THAT is a firing offense or perhaps involves a demotion in what kind of vehicles one can drive, or to a warehouse position or something. This considers both intent and repeat offenses.

Most rule systems work on similar principles. All of us know people who cause significant harm and don't accept responsibility for it, saying that it was "just" an accident. Intent is only part of the picture.

If some start killing people for the fun of it is that mistake or on purpose.

@Peacefulperson If someone kills for fun (or any other reason, actually) then it's a conscious decision to have fun at others's expense and demonstrates a lack of empathy (among other deficits). So that would be purposeful activity. If the person is, say, mentally challenged or psychologically unwell, they may in a sense "accidentally" skip some necessary steps in evaluating whether they should or shouldn't murder, thus arriving at a wrong conclusion -- but because murder is such a great harm, there is not usually a lot of leeway or "benefit of the doubt" for such actions. In an ideal world an impaired / challenged person would be recognized and managed well before murder came into the picture.

Good case in point is the shooter at the Florida high school yesterday. He will spend the rest of his life in prison or possibly get the death penalty depending on Florida state law, but if the legal and mental health systems had done their jobs and we had rational gun controls, it never would have gotten to the place it did, either.

@Peacefulperson If you kill for fun, then you probably won't be sorry.

For me if I took something that I shouldn't have taken than I won't be sorry I will just replace it. Sorry doesn't change anything

@Peacefulperson "Sorry" recognizes that you have harmed / inconvenienced / disrespected others and is a social signifier that you fully own that you did a bad thing and will strive not to repeat it. Making restitution is only part of the picture.

The Magic Two Words, "I'm sorry" is not at all hard to utter and mean it. But for some inexplicable reason, some people are incapable of going there. It represents some irrational loss of face or something. The way most people will take your lack of contrition is that they will assume (usually, correctly) that you don't actually care that you harmed them.

In any case, there's the problem that some things aren't replaceable. If you run over someone's child, you can't replace it. Also, you might run over other people's children. Because children are particularly precious to a civil society, you will be arrested, jailed, etc for doing so. Whether or not it was an accident and whether or not you said "oops". However, genuine, heartfelt contrition is still appreciated and will be considered in determining your sentencing and will also be helpful to the grieving parents.

@Peacefulperson If someone stole something from me, I'd rather a genuine, heartfelt apology than anything else. It shows they feel remorse for what they've done and won't do it again, to me or anyone else.