4 ms·

Respectfully, those are the wrong questions to ask. Instead: What injustices are happening today that we tolerate as part of the status quo? What can we do to

Respectfully, those are the wrong questions to ask. Instead: What injustices are happening today that we tolerate as part of the status quo? What can we do to ensure - today and tomorrow — that innocents are not preyed upon because it is easy and convenient to look the other way?

crimsonalucard 7y ago
Respectfully disagree. such questions are relevant. No system is perfect and every system can be exploited to serve the prejudices of individuals. Everything from the super rich exploiting tax loop holes to putting innocent people on death row. Not only one must close the loop hole, but the exploiter must be punished as an example. Part of ensuring things is to enforce consequences. The more extreme the crime the more extreme the consequence. The consequence serves two roles. One role is to help the criminal learn, but more importantly it's to help other people learn that you cannot commit such heinous acts without repercussions. Without consequences no system of enforcement will work. What this article describes was never tolerated by society. It was a loop hole that when exploited had little consequence.
- TheNorthman 7y ago
  > One role is to help the criminal learn Do you believe that punishment is an ideal way to learn? How do you imagine this `punishment` to be carried out [0]? Assuming you're American: the primary systems prisons have been modeled after have been the Auburn system and the Separate system and both of these models have a pretty heavy recidivism. I'm danish and our prisons are mostly built on the premise of rehabilitation and have attempted to shy away from what was perceived as "meaningless" oppression (although this is slowly changing towards a more Kantian view of punishment, something the general media portrays as being bad). In contrast to the American system ours is one of relatively low recidivism. [0]: My question might seem snarky, it's really not. From my perspective "punishment" is rarely discussed, so I'm genuinely curious regarding, not so much the justification that much is clear, but the intended "carrying out" of said punishment is interesting to me.
  - crimsonalucard 7y ago
    >Do you believe that punishment is an ideal way to learn? How do you imagine this `punishment` to be carried out [0]? Clearly punishment works to deter both humans and animals from doing certain things. This has been shown to be true in experimentation. Additionally the threat of punishment is by far more important. However there are many instances where punishment can serve to do nothing or even make things worse. In the general case this is not true, but there are many specific instances where it is true. One example is the drug addict. You cannot clean up a drug addict by punishing him. Or even less clear is how do you stop a career criminal from doing the only thing he has known how to do for his entire life? A punishment will not suffice in both cases. BUT the punishment must exist. I'm not saying that the American System is the way to go. Clearly from the data it is not. But I am saying that the question of consequences must be enforced. The consequence must be negative as well. Additionally to get to your point, the punishment probably shouldn't be so extreme as to have detrimental effects, additionally programs for rehabilitation can be implemented as well for effectiveness. Even in the danish system, there must be negative consequences for negative actions in order for a society to function.... there is no way around it. Find me an example of a society that has zero punishment for criminals that still functions and I can probably change my mind.
    - TheNorthman 7y ago
      I think the trouble for me is the difference between rehabilitation with punishment as an unintended but ultimately necessary bi-product and rehabilitation _and_ punishment. A difference, to borrow from Mao, in "motive force", where the motive becomes a physicality in that it affects the mental world of the, so called, prisoner. I can agree to the fact that "punishment" of some form is unavoidable but I think that the rehabilitation serves as a punishment in itself. I fear that "the prisoner mind" is affected by what it itself deems "appropriate" and what it deems "unnecessary" punishment [0]. [0]: You might exchange the words "appropriate" and "unnecessary" with "private" and "public", as in what is done for private benefit and what is done for public benefit.
      - crimsonalucard 7y ago

crimsonalucard 7y ago

Respectfully disagree. such questions are relevant. No system is perfect and every system can be exploited to serve the prejudices of individuals. Everything from the super rich exploiting tax loop holes to putting innocent people on death row. Not only one must close the loop hole, but the exploiter must be punished as an example. Part of ensuring things is to enforce consequences. The more extreme the crime the more extreme the consequence. The consequence serves two roles. One role is to help the criminal learn, but more importantly it's to help other people learn that you cannot commit such heinous acts without repercussions. Without consequences no system of enforcement will work. What this article describes was never tolerated by society. It was a loop hole that when exploited had little consequence.

TheNorthman 7y ago
> One role is to help the criminal learn Do you believe that punishment is an ideal way to learn? How do you imagine this `punishment` to be carried out [0]? Assuming you're American: the primary systems prisons have been modeled after have been the Auburn system and the Separate system and both of these models have a pretty heavy recidivism. I'm danish and our prisons are mostly built on the premise of rehabilitation and have attempted to shy away from what was perceived as "meaningless" oppression (although this is slowly changing towards a more Kantian view of punishment, something the general media portrays as being bad). In contrast to the American system ours is one of relatively low recidivism. [0]: My question might seem snarky, it's really not. From my perspective "punishment" is rarely discussed, so I'm genuinely curious regarding, not so much the justification that much is clear, but the intended "carrying out" of said punishment is interesting to me.
- crimsonalucard 7y ago
  >Do you believe that punishment is an ideal way to learn? How do you imagine this `punishment` to be carried out [0]? Clearly punishment works to deter both humans and animals from doing certain things. This has been shown to be true in experimentation. Additionally the threat of punishment is by far more important. However there are many instances where punishment can serve to do nothing or even make things worse. In the general case this is not true, but there are many specific instances where it is true. One example is the drug addict. You cannot clean up a drug addict by punishing him. Or even less clear is how do you stop a career criminal from doing the only thing he has known how to do for his entire life? A punishment will not suffice in both cases. BUT the punishment must exist. I'm not saying that the American System is the way to go. Clearly from the data it is not. But I am saying that the question of consequences must be enforced. The consequence must be negative as well. Additionally to get to your point, the punishment probably shouldn't be so extreme as to have detrimental effects, additionally programs for rehabilitation can be implemented as well for effectiveness. Even in the danish system, there must be negative consequences for negative actions in order for a society to function.... there is no way around it. Find me an example of a society that has zero punishment for criminals that still functions and I can probably change my mind.
  - TheNorthman 7y ago
    I think the trouble for me is the difference between rehabilitation with punishment as an unintended but ultimately necessary bi-product and rehabilitation _and_ punishment. A difference, to borrow from Mao, in "motive force", where the motive becomes a physicality in that it affects the mental world of the, so called, prisoner. I can agree to the fact that "punishment" of some form is unavoidable but I think that the rehabilitation serves as a punishment in itself. I fear that "the prisoner mind" is affected by what it itself deems "appropriate" and what it deems "unnecessary" punishment [0]. [0]: You might exchange the words "appropriate" and "unnecessary" with "private" and "public", as in what is done for private benefit and what is done for public benefit.
    - crimsonalucard 7y ago