4 ms·

You could imagine circumstances where the officers outlook was justified or not justified. I think judging them based on only this off hand remark about someone

You could imagine circumstances where the officers outlook was justified or not justified. I think judging them based on only this off hand remark about someone's perception of them is not merited. For example, suppose you knew that one inmate had repeatedly beaten his wife and child. While in prison he abused and threatened inmates and guards. You suspected he perpetrated the violent rape of multiple other inmates but can't prove it because the victims refuse to testify. You think he's in the class because he's bored. In this hypothetical, would it be wrong for some correctional officers to believe the notional inmate didn't deserve the chance?

posterboy 7y ago
The point is, the officers did not deserve to make such claims. Not under the veil of ambiguity, nor pessimism. Your strawman is a fallacy. Suppose an inmate had committed a logical fallacy. Should they thence be barred from reason (reasoning?)? English isn't my first language, sorry. PS: You might say the hypothetically notional inmate deserved the offer, but wasn't eligable to go, though one had to wonder why. You might also say it was morally imperative for the officer to bring up charges, if they were sufficiently convinced, to instate conditions that would isolate the culprit from maths education, social interactions in general, and probably any hope of correction.
- ALittleLight 7y ago
  I don't understand your comment. My point is, because you don't know the officers, inmates, or the broader situation, you shouldn't comment as to whether the officers are right or wrong - because you don't know. There are possible worlds where the officers are justified or misunderstood and there are possible worlds where the officers hold incorrect beliefs. What evidence lets you know which possible world is more likely? Being prejudiced against the officers strikes me as similar to the imagined (and possibly real) situation where the officers are prejudiced against the inmates. We, as readers, just don't know.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    Your comment pretty much ignores the context of the statement about the correctional officers. You are basically saying "we can't tell a thing about the officers, but we know the author is a jerk for castigating them". Never mind that the author has all the things you want, the broader knowledge of the situation and so on.
Enginerrrd 7y ago
>In this hypothetical, would it be wrong for some correctional officers to believe the notional inmate didn't deserve the chance? Frankly, yes, IMO. It isn't their job, and it generally really doesn't accomplish anything to induce avoidable suffering in another entity. You're painting a picture of a person unwilling to change. That's fine, there are plenty such people. But what does it accomplish to deny them some trivial pleasure when they have already been denied the great majority of their freedoms? To do so seems pretty childish to me.

posterboy 7y ago

The point is, the officers did not deserve to make such claims. Not under the veil of ambiguity, nor pessimism. Your strawman is a fallacy. Suppose an inmate had committed a logical fallacy. Should they thence be barred from reason (reasoning?)? English isn't my first language, sorry. PS: You might say the hypothetically notional inmate deserved the offer, but wasn't eligable to go, though one had to wonder why. You might also say it was morally imperative for the officer to bring up charges, if they were sufficiently convinced, to instate conditions that would isolate the culprit from maths education, social interactions in general, and probably any hope of correction.

ALittleLight 7y ago
I don't understand your comment. My point is, because you don't know the officers, inmates, or the broader situation, you shouldn't comment as to whether the officers are right or wrong - because you don't know. There are possible worlds where the officers are justified or misunderstood and there are possible worlds where the officers hold incorrect beliefs. What evidence lets you know which possible world is more likely? Being prejudiced against the officers strikes me as similar to the imagined (and possibly real) situation where the officers are prejudiced against the inmates. We, as readers, just don't know.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Your comment pretty much ignores the context of the statement about the correctional officers. You are basically saying "we can't tell a thing about the officers, but we know the author is a jerk for castigating them". Never mind that the author has all the things you want, the broader knowledge of the situation and so on.

Enginerrrd 7y ago

>In this hypothetical, would it be wrong for some correctional officers to believe the notional inmate didn't deserve the chance? Frankly, yes, IMO. It isn't their job, and it generally really doesn't accomplish anything to induce avoidable suffering in another entity. You're painting a picture of a person unwilling to change. That's fine, there are plenty such people. But what does it accomplish to deny them some trivial pleasure when they have already been denied the great majority of their freedoms? To do so seems pretty childish to me.