I have already proposed a moral progression for judgments: arrive at a consensus on a fact, derive a standard, and then, if necessary, judge people against that standard. You can do that with real people, although judging always requires prudence, but you cannot do it with fictional characters.

As for what judging means, I do not know what it means to you. but perhaps I can help by defining a couple of parameters:

(1) I do not believe you can judge people because you disagree with them.
I believe that a valid judgment requires, at minimum, a moral consensus.

(2) I believe judgments require clarity.
Many of the implied judgments referenced in this discussion seem to me to also lack clarity. Consider, from the title, the pseudo-scientific formulation, “Peter Pan Syndrome”. Google DSM IV and “Peter Pan”, and you will find that psychologists do not appear to recognise such a condition. This raises the question: why use the word “syndrome” at all? The term “Peter Pan Syndrome” appears to denote a failure to follow an appropriate life path, yet I have not had a clear answer from anyone on the two obvious questions: can you define that life path, and how many people agree on the duty to follow such a path?

I’d also like to point out that if we could control when we had epiphanies, they wouldn’t be epiphanies.

So, is it wrong to be judgmental of the fictional character? Or is it fine to judge “Mark,” but you’re concerned that Hugo may be extending the judgment to other people in the real world who don’t actually resemble Mark?

I believe this discussion has relevance because it raises the question of when (if ever) it makes sense for us to judge other people

If they’re fictional characters, I think the answer is “frequently.” If they’re not fictional, I think the answer depends heavily on what sense of the word “judge” we’re using.

Well, clear thinking tells me that the “workable solution” to the behaviour of fictional character simply involves remembering that when you look at that scene between “Mark” and “Juno”, you really see two adult professionals, one of them wearing a pillow, following a written script in front of a camera. Any search for “workable solutions” in the context of someone’s reaction to a work of fiction has built-in limits. Do people like “Mark” exist? Probably. Would his actions play out in real life the way they do in the film? Based on my knowledge of the realities of adoption, probably not. Does it therefore make any sense to judge a whole category of people based on our reaction to a fictional character? I don’t believe so.

I believe this discussion has relevance because it raises the question of when (if ever) it makes sense for us to judge other people, and on what basis we may (or may not) do so. I believe it makes to strongly encourage individual people not to behave in selfish and destructive behaviour (which, let us note, includes behaviour stereotypically associated with “growing up” in our consumer culture). However, I do not believe it makes any sense at all to judge a whole category of people as behaving “badly” when no consensus exists of what “good” behaviour in this connection might entail.

“My objection to judging, aside from Matthew 7.1 and Luke 6.37, stems from my perception that fostering judgmental attitudes breaks up coalitions, obscures clear observation of problems, clear thought about problems, and hinders the search for workable solutions. In short, I consider judging a bad thing to promote for people on the Left. I don’t have to engage in the behavior complained of to find the judgment inappropriate.”

So then to tie this into the movie Juno and Jason Bateman’s character, who Hugo objected too, then what are your “clear thoughts” and what do you see as a “workable solution”?

As far as judging goes, yes, those two verses are the most quoted and misquoted, depending on one’s agenda. In fact, I’d say Matthew 7:1 wins the popular vote for those manipulative individuals trying to shirk all personal responsibility for destructive behaviors. It also comes in handy for silencing the voices of their “targets”. Yet they are not the only verses on the subject and here’s a small sampling to name a few:

Psa 37:30, Psa 119:13, Prov 31:9, Luke 7:43, Ezek 22:2, 1 Cor 2:15, 1 Cor 6:2 and 1 Cor 6:3.

Hugo:
I think your point confuses stating a fact, setting a standard, and judging a person. The civil rights movement stated a fact: African Americans have the same inherent worth and dignity as other people. That set a standard for the way other people, and the government, should treat African Americans. And, slowly and painfully, Americans in the South and the North brought their behaviour into line with that standard. But as someone who has done a fair bit of work in solidarity with oppressed people, judgment, in the sense of declaring individuals and groups of people unworthy of sympathy, had nothing to do with it. Indeed, I have done my share of watching people doing anti-oppression work struggling to convince people that condemning an unjust system did not mean judging people who grew up in that system. People’s perceptions of judgment, in these cases, acted as an obstacle to justice.

And while I agree that if we don’t encourage one another to do our best, disaster awaits us, disaster waits the unwary judge as well. In both our countries, newcomers judged the first nations cultures they encountered, and those judgments led to disasters and deep shame. And in many situations, these judgments, and the shame, continue to go on. Judging wrongly can lead to as much trouble as not judging. So let me ask you again, in this specific instance: by what standard do you determine the “correct” life path for young men (or women)?

“When you call some class of persons unworthy of your sympathy, or fantasize about acting violently towards them, I’d call that judgmental. I don’t lack sympathy, or empathy for Hugo, and I don’t think of him as a bad person, and I certainly don’t have any impulse to assault him, or to assault anyone who thinks like him. I disagree with his specific approach to this specific issue.”

This sounds like a yes, but…..Also I’m curious, if you disagree with his specific approach to this specific issue then why not just say that. That would be direct and clear. And then follow up your criticism with why you lack disagreement, or do you know exactly why you disagree. I don’t get the rest of your argumentative approach here other than to judge and criticize Hugo yourself and that is how it sounds. It’s obvious there’s far more to what you are saying here than what meets the eye, otherwise you would not persist. What is it that you are trying to accomplish. Does Hugo’s writings just yank your chain? Did he piss you off, or is there another emotional reason why you are reacting to his writing as you are?

As for the movie and what you state above, only people who behave like the character in Juno would have sympathy for him. Others who recognize behavior in themselves which was similar to the character may have little sympathy, especially if they recognize or feel that the behaviors in question demonstrated a lack of empathy towards others–being selfish, destructive and harmful. What problem do you have with that? As for your comment about Hugo fantasizing about acting violently towards the character….I don’t think he does. It’s more a figure of speech–a strong one. I’ve heard many people express similar sentiments, especially when they are exasperated by the childish behaviors of others. And these people don’t strike out at others, nor do they generally advocate violence. It’s more giving voice to their strong feelings. I think most people would recognize this. If he talked about a specific person all the time stating that he wanted to smack him, then it would signal a red flag. I’ve read enough of his writings to glean that he doesn’t act violently towards others and doesn’t advocate it. I think you get this too, so I’m curious what exactly is your point here and what are you trying to accomplish?

But I would like to ask you specifically where we differ. Do you

(a) consider it worthwhile to judge people who disagree with you?
If so, do you really think that judging people will convince them?

(b) think a consensus on the “right” life path for men or women exists?
If so, how widely do you think people hold it?