|
Smudgie Buggler posted:Of course they can. The first bit isn't true. In a purely cumulative view of utility, where it's not about the average utility but about the total utility, every additional person makes society a little bit better.
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
WillyTheNewGuy posted:Many American Christians would see abortion doctors as horribly evil people who commit murder for a living, and that perspective is quite obvious to them. Hi thanks female goon posting happy to be here - this is a big, big reason this undoubtedly male dominated forum should be against the death penalty. You guys can have that toy when entire governments stop trying to criminalize my normal biological responses and behaviors and basically want to make the other half of your society into de facto murderers in the eyes of the law because Babies. I'm here all night folks tip the waiter
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:The first bit isn't true. In a purely cumulative view of utility, where it's not about the average utility but about the total utility, every additional person makes society a little bit better. You're just a priori ruling out the possibility that an individual can contribute negative utility to the world. Good job. edit: what sort of retarded idea is maximising "average utility" anyway? That would just lead you to killing everybody but the happiest person on Earth. Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Mar 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Say that in the future we invent some perfect lie defector and mind reader, some form of advanced brain analyzer. Why does desert need to enter this equation? I mean, it can, but there's still a perfectly adequate utilitarian case to be made for punishing defectors from the norm of not murdering people even if you know for certain the particular offenders in question will never do it again. Collectively, we have every reason to want to disincentivise people from doing their first murder as their fifth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:You're just a priori ruling out the possibility that an individual can contribute negative utility to the world. Good job. Cumulative utility leads to another 'repugnant conclusion' where infinite people living lives the slightest bit better than death is preferable to vast numbers of people living lives that are really really good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:Why does desert need to enter this equation? I mean, it can, but there's still a perfectly adequate utilitarian case to be made for punishing defectors from the norm of not murdering people even if you know for certain the particular offenders in question will never do it again. Collectively, we have every reason to want to disincentivise people from doing their first murder as their fifth. The utilitarian case allows for edge scenarios where guilty people are rewarded instead of punished, as long as everyone thinks they have been punished. Also punishing innocent people is just as good a deterrent as punishing guilty people, as long as you can convincingly frame them. Many people think this would be wrong, so deserts enter into it for a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
The answer is that the guy deprived society of his wife's contributions to society and his wife of her right to be alive. He also committed fraud against his insurer (unless they stipulated murdering your spouse was a condition you could make a claim against) and they should sue him for breach of contract. We need to make it clear that such flagrant violations of our agreed-upon rules will not be tolerated, and so we'll take him away for awhile and hopefully indoctrinate him with our belief that people are more important than money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Cumulative utility leads to another 'repugnant conclusion' where infinite people living lives the slightest bit better than death is preferable to vast numbers of people living lives that are really really good. Of course. Utilitarianism is batshit. But, as I said, no matter the utilitarian's utility function, you're better off without negative-utility people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:We need to make it clear that such flagrant violations of our agreed-upon rules will not be tolerated, and so we'll take him away for awhile and hopefully indoctrinate him with our belief that people are more important than money. Yeah my dude killing unrepentant murderers of opportunity is barbaric and obviously wrong, but brainwashing them with my universalist egalitarian moral framework is the poo poo. Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Mar 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:Yeah my dude killing unrepentant murderers of opportunity is barbaric and obviously wrong, but brainwashing them with my universality egalitarian moral framework is the poo poo. Death is preferable to being persuaded? Are you sure you want to say this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Death is preferable to being persuaded? Are you sure you want to say this? What the hell makes you think I care in the slightest what the guy who killed his wife for money would prefer? edit: I do like how deftly you pivoted from "indoctrinate" to "persuade" though. That was cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:What the hell makes you think I care in the slightest what the guy who killed his wife for money would prefer? Indoctrination doesn't mean brainwashing, either, my guy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Indoctrination doesn't mean brainwashing, either, my guy. Are you retarded? 
Smudgie Buggler fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Mar 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:Are you retarded? Your incompetence at linking images is almost as good as you not reading the list of synonyms all the way through before posting it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Your incompetence at linking images is almost as good as you not reading the list of synonyms all the way through before posting it. OK so you're going to rely on "brainwashing" and "persuading" being the same thing? That's cool man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:OK so you're going to rely on "brainwashing" and "persuading" being the same thing? No, I'm saying that "indoctrinate" is a concept that overlaps both of them and you shrieking about how rehabilitative justice is evil is far more telling about your moral failings than it is an ethical argument.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:No, I'm saying that "indoctrinate" is a concept that overlaps both of them and you shrieking about how rehabilitative justice is evil is far more telling about your moral failings than it is an ethical argument. a) I'm not doing that, I'm asking why anybody should give enough of a poo poo about what the wife-murderer would prefer to want to spend the difference between a .45 to the back of the head and decades of whatever fluffy rehabilitative re-education camp you idiots have in mind b) the fact that you don't think "rehabilitative justice" is an oxymoron is cute as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:a) I'm not doing that, I'm asking why anybody should give enough of a poo poo about what the wife-murderer would prefer to want to spend the difference between a .45 to the back of the head and decades of whatever fluffy rehabilitative re-education camp you idiots have in mind I was making a point about your preferences, that you believe death is superior to persuasion on a moral level. Which, I see, you actually do believe. One wonders why you're not railing for the reinstitution of corporal punishment, since after all prison only guarantees psychological damage. Surely, from your point of view, it would be better if criminals were guaranteed to be maimed when they came out?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I was making a point about your preferences, that you believe death is superior to persuasion on a moral level. This implies I think it's preferable to shoot you than convince you not to kill me. Not the case. I do, however, think instantiating a policy of shooting you if and when you ever decide to kill me would be a powerful persuasion tool. quote:Which, I see, you actually do believe. One wonders why you're not railing for the reinstitution of corporal punishment, since after all prison only guarantees psychological damage. Surely, from your point of view, it would be better if criminals were guaranteed to be maimed when they came out? Prison is literally the most retarded thing you can possibly to do a defector from the social contract if you want them to change their behaviour for the better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:This implies I think it's preferable to shoot you than convince you not to kill me. Not the case. I'm not defending prisons as rehabilitative, you loving idiot, as you should, by all rights, have been able to figure out by reading my post where I said that prisons are injurious and that you should object to them because they're not injurious enough. How did you get through college with that level of reading comprehension? Did you maintain a solid C- average?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I'm not defending prisons as rehabilitative, you loving idiot, as you should, by all rights, have been able to figure out by reading my post where I said that prisons are injurious and that you should object to them because they're not injurious enough. How did you get through college with that level of reading comprehension? Did you maintain a solid C- average? gently caress me you're an angry little man. I didn't think you were defending prisons as rehabilitative; I was simply rejecting the premise of your idiotic question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:gently caress me you're an angry little man. Don't sign your posts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Say that in the future we invent some perfect lie defector and mind reader, some form of advanced brain analyzer. What is the value of talking about any of this stuff in these kinds of completely abstracted and unreal scenarios? Should the United States as it exists today have the death penalty? That's the kind of question whose answer actually matters for anything more than words on the internet. It's the kind you can change policy off of, ie. affect actual human beings' lives and actually make the world a better place with. Bullshit hypotheticals are a waste of time and energy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:Yeah my dude killing unrepentant murderers of opportunity is barbaric and obviously wrong, but brainwashing them with my universalist egalitarian moral framework is the poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 11:45
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:What is the value of talking about any of this stuff in these kinds of completely abstracted and unreal scenarios? See above, the end of the post you quoted part of. Also the person I quoted. I thought it was pretty clearly explained, let me know if it's not. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 13:37 on Mar 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
Smudgie Buggler posted:gently caress me you're an angry little man. Have you ever heard the parable of the piss-soaked thing? Jacob and Esau were traveling along the road to Galilee, and on the side of the road Jacob spotted something in the dirt. It looked like a bundle of cloth, but it was all wet. Jacob looked to Esau and said "I wonder if there is something valuable inside." The two brothers looked closely, and Esau replied "it smells like piss, it looks like it is soaked in piss." "I know," said Jacob, "but I want to see if there is anything inside." Esau sighed, and watched Jacob pick up the bundle and carefully unwrap it. There was nothing inside, and Jacob got piss all over his hands and his clothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:The answer is that the guy deprived society of his wife's contributions to society and his wife of her right to be alive. He also committed fraud against his insurer (unless they stipulated murdering your spouse was a condition you could make a claim against) and they should sue him for breach of contract. Does he deserve to be punished for depriving his wife of her right to be alive?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Does he deserve to be punished for depriving his wife of her right to be alive? What's the purpose of the punishment? Deterrence? Rehabilitation? Restitution? Protection of society from future crimes? I'm sure all of the above, but the question is really what penalty best serves those ends. What about killing him is a better punishment than locking him up forever, or torturing him forever, or making him into a slave laborer? Any of those are as morally repugnant as murdering him, if not less.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:What's the purpose of the punishment? Deterrence? Rehabilitation? Restitution? Protection of society from future crimes? Because the people who are forced by the law and their jobs to kill him do not also become murderers. Who do we hire to kill people? Why is paying someone to murder someone else only legal when the state does it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Does he deserve to be punished for depriving his wife of her right to be alive? No, because no one ever deserves anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:No, because no one ever deserves anything. But then no one deserves not to be executed, either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:piss story I take your point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 10:38
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:What's the purpose of the punishment? Deterrence? Rehabilitation? Restitution? Protection of society from future crimes? I'd say he does deserve to be punished because he did something wrong. I don't think it would be wrong to give him the death penalty for it. It's not morally repugnant to execute a murderer. As above, the death penalty for murderers has virtues like exact proportionality to the crime. It also fulfills the golden rule or the categorical imperative. In utilitarian terms, it is as good as a deterrent as other sever penalties, and it absolutely prevents recidivism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 12:43
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I'd say he does deserve to be punished because he did something wrong. I don't think it would be wrong to give him the death penalty for it. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Does he deserve to be punished for depriving his wife of her right to be alive? I know we should strive really hard to figure out how to preserve the offender's right to life as we move forward in figuring out what to do in reaction to his criminal activity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:I know we should strive really hard to figure out how to preserve the offender's right to life as we move forward in figuring out what to do in reaction to his criminal activity. How can he have the same right to be alive after he murdered his wife as before?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Given that fines and prison terms are interconvertible for certain offenses, if we are concerned about proportionality, we must in turn be able to pay our way out of any prison term or death sentence, treating a death sentence as equivalent to life in prison and calculating the precise cost from actuarial tables.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:What is the value of talking about any of this stuff in these kinds of completely abstracted and unreal scenarios? The obvious answer is that the death penalty needs to be eliminated immediately as step one of a complete overhaul of our prison systems and enhancement of our justice system. All this back and forth about perfect lie detectors and absolute morality belongs in a philosophy classroom or pot-haze filled dorm room, not a serious discussion about policy and its impact on human lives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
D&D is substantially closer to the former than the latter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
LeJackal posted:The obvious answer is that the death penalty needs to be eliminated immediately as step one of a complete overhaul of our prison systems and enhancement of our justice system. But that doesn't seem obvious at all. It's the very thing we're all arguing about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 20:17
|
|