This strange concept came to my mind - in life, we are "responsible" for many things - to God, to our teachers (i.e. academic areas), to authorities, to our (future) lovers, to our friends, to our classmates, to our CCA-mates, to our peers, to the environment, to "society", to "morality in general" etc. The word has many different meanings, some though not all of which are well-defined in the dictionary. Typically, when I see the word, I would associate it with reliability and accountability. However, these words do not seem to be appropriate for all the responsibilities mentioned earlier.
In my opinion, the nature of responsibility depends largely on the context. I will subdivide the situations outlined earlier - though they are by no means exhaustive - into four main groups of cases, and then analyse the form of responsibility that is involved in each of these groups. The four groups refer to spiritual responsibility (responsibility to God), relationship responsibility (responsibility to lovers and friends), professional responsibility (responsibility to teachers, authorities, CCA-mates and peers) and ethical responsibility (to environment, society, morality in general). Of course, certain cases are not very well-defined; for example, in my case, there are people I would consider friends, CCA-mates and peers as well as a part of society and humanity in general. However, instead of being an inhibitor to the discussion of this concept, it helps to reflect that the responsibilities we have to a certain person or entity may span two or more of the aforementioned categories.
I will discuss the hopefully simplest case first - professional responsibility. I find that "responsibility" in the context of school typically refers to preparing and handing in one's assignments on time, preparing adequately for tests and examinations and the like. With regards to CCA-mates and peers, it would include doing one's share of a group project or completing various CCA duties; in the context of authorities, it could refer to properly filing tax. Hence, in a professional context, responsibility somewhat seems to be related to being dutiful or accountable. Yet, does responsibility stop there? Or does it continue on -- are we responsible to, for example, help our teachers even if they do not request it? Are we responsible to do more than one's share of a group project, for example, by becoming the group's leader? For a personal example, though I am no longer the Juniors NCO, am I responsible to help the new Juniors NCOs ease into their jobs if they don't ask for any help? In short - is initiative a part of responsibility?
Quasi-predictably, my answer is yes and no. I think the reasons for "no" are fairly simple. Many of these "extra"-dutiful actions are described as "going the extra mile" - that's it. "(E)xtra" - not necessary. Typically, not becoming a group leader does not make one unaccountable or unreliable. However, I am not too comfortable with a completely "no" answer, even though I cannot find strong logical ground to reject the answer - the reasons for this will be detailed later.
I will now discuss ethical responsibility. Many aspects of ethical responsibility would relate to aspects of spiritual responsibility I will discuss at the end, because many of these appear to appeal to the conscience, and I find that generally, if one carries out his spiritual responsibilities, it will be fairly natural for him to carry out most of his ethical responsibilities, at least to the point where ethical responsibility is generally not directly committed e.g. intentionally lying to a blind man when helping him cross a road. It seems, however, that sometimes there is a lack of duality in ethical responsibility - the line between 'responsible' and 'irresponsible' can be very difficult to draw. This problem holds true to some extent in each of the four types, though it appears to hold the strongest here. Is eating shark's fin soup irresponsible to the environment due to the toll it takes on shark populations? Is eating it irresponsible to morality, due to the oft-publicised cruelty of finning? Is eating it irresponsible to society, due to the fact that with the cost of one bowl of soup (easily $40), you could easily feed an ACS(I) student in the IB canteen lunch for almost three weeks (assumed at $2 per meal) or for that matter improve the lives of many of Singapore's poor via donating rice or noodles to a donation drive? Many of these issues are highly ambiguous, since a person can dismiss many of the questions with the simple answer that he had the money to purchase the soup, and take advantage of the ambiguity with regard to these responsibilities.
I am not really 'of age' yet, so responsibility with lovers will remain out of the picture for now. However, for me, responsibility with friends has been a very touchy issue. I think it is not unreasonable to expect that many people would want friends who are responsible. However, what does this responsibility entail? This appears to depend on the individual's definition of responsibility - to the point where the dictionary definition can be totally expunged. For some people including myself, a responsible friend is one who can be trusted, who will listen to rants and complaints, who will help you physically, professionally and spiritually (within his means), look out for you and accept you as a person. It's a hefty requirement, but I find this definition suitable; because I believe that to some extent one should treat others as one wishes to be treated. Hence, I typically am careful to see that I can consider the person responsible before entrusting so much to the person. Yet, for others, a responsible friend might simply be one who is constantly willing to lend money, or one who constantly parties around with him (fair-weather friend).
I've experienced painful rifts in friendships before, largely due to my own ignorance (I think all of the people I know fairly closely now, except Shaun, have experienced this before). I must thank God that most of them have worked out now. This could reflect some further element of responsibility in a friendship - overlooking the faults in the other person. But can this really be considered responsibility - or is it, again, merely going the "extra" mile? Tough question.
Finally, spiritual responsibility. I will quote from Ecclesiastes. I think I have quoted this verse before, probably in the essay on The Meaning of Life I wrote last year, but I find it a very memorable and appropriate verse.
"Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter.
Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man."
(Ecc 12:13)
This has two parts - fearing God, and keeping His commandments.
I will start with "keeping his commandments", for it seems simpler to discuss. The commandments referred to here would seem to include the Ten Commandments in Exodus, some of the "commandments" Jesus mentioned in the Gospels (loving God, loving your neighbour as yourself). There is a third group of "commandments" that I am a bit hesitant about their inclusion in the discussion, but they are generally related to fearing God - such as when God spoke out of Heaven, telling the people "This is my Son, with whom I am pleased. Listen to him!"
To me, keeping the commandments is clearly a type of responsibility somewhat analogous to following school rules, societal rules and the like, except that the commandments are more absolute than school or societal rules since the latter might not be so upright. However, what about fearing God? This seems to involve developing a relationship with Him, as many Christians like me might say, a "walk" with God. This brings even more questions - are reading the Bible and doing QT, which we are seemingly supposed to do as "good Christians" - responsibilities?
In conclusion, I think that as I have covered the various cases, I have gained a little bit of insight. There seem two different senses of responsibilities which I will call "cold" and "warm". "Cold" responsibility typically refers to dutifulness on a mechanical level (largely the case in professional responsibility); typically, we will have to face strong, mechanical negative consequences if we do not exhibit it. To some extent, there is a small amount of "cold" responsibility in ethical and relationship responsibilities, since constant "infractions" against seeming responsibility in the ethical dimension can result in one's conscience tormenting one's psyche, and I would not think that people would like their friends to leave them. Conversely, "warm" responsibility refers to initiative and dutifulness transcending the mechanical level mentioned earlier, and it seems to apply in all four types, though more strongly in relationship responsibility as elaborated earlier, and of course spiritual responsibility. To excel in situations, it seems that we will need to exhibit "warm" responsibility - going the extra mile - for if we don't, we can be outshined and overshadowed by those who do. For example, take a work situation. A worker who cultivates a strong relationship with one's superiors often results in a much better professional situation for him than another who does not bother, ceteris paribus. Even though the worker who does not bother has not been explicitly and directly irresponsible, he has "lost out".
I believe that it should be restated that responsibilities are not mutually exclusive - to various entities and people, we have several types of responsibilities. Hence, I would not recommend for one to try and show lots of responsibility in one specific area to a person while neglecting the other areas. It would not be too unnatural for the person to become suspicious...
On a closing note, I should say that from a Christian perspective, our deeds alone cannot save us - the only way we are saved is through the grace of Jesus Christ. However, WE have to make the decision to accept Him. As oft-quoted, though cliched to some extent - He stands at the door and knocks. Will you open?
Your grace has found me just as I am
empty-handed but alive in Your hands
jk
