For those who believe the writer bears responsibility for the reader's reaction (see link): Why?

Question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061004140510AALdpaW&pa=FYd1D2bwHTHwIbNvHe8yQCs1OBzhpYrlsq1a0P_lShs5ooMgf5jzuEYgjPWHR7oSrjXDham.qHTSmA--&msgr_status=

There is a story in the local news about two men arguing. One man went outside for a breath of fresh air. The other man came out bearing a butcher's knife and stabbed the first in the back.

Is this simply a more violent example of the logic you are applying? If the reader (listener) need not bear responsibility for his/her reaction to what is written (spoken), are there no bounds to the extent the reader (listener) can react?

In a world where everyone is speaking/writing, when do you accept complete responsibility for your own reaction to those words? When do you accept responsibility for your own actions?

Or do you always blame others for what you do?

Yeppers: yes, I know. You were not one of those I was thinking of :-)

MRL: Goodness! it's been an age since we've last seen -you-. Welcome back (I think) ;-)

Answer 1

The responsibility is on both. You are responsible for your actions, but the writer is responsible too. If I write on a false police report that the man in front of you killed your best friend, then dress up as a cop to present it to you, I am responsible in part for your action if you harm him. If a book is published about how and why to be a good terrorist, it is the writers fault in part if the reader becomes a terrorist.

Answer 2

My answer is still the same, it is the readers.

Answer 3

REPORTED!!