|
twodot posted:As I've said, I'm also against the death penalty, I'm just pointing out that death as a special category due to finality doesn't work as an argument. You can end a prison sentence. You can't end a carried-out death sentence.
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:49 |
|
|
twodot posted:edit: A carried out prison sentence also can't be ended, Yes it can. You can end it by letting them out of prison. twodot posted:so I'm assuming you are in favor of imprisoning people for all of eternity, so that we possess the capability to some day end their ever lasting sentence) What the hell are you talking about. You can let people out of prison. You can't let them out of the grave.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
twodot posted:Sorry you misunderstand, someone goes to prison for a year, after a year they are let out of prison, at this point their prison sentence can't be stopped. They can not be let out of prison again. If you oppose sentences that can't be stopped, you are opposed to finite prison sentences. Also fines. Dude there's a difference between stopping something and retroactively causing it to never have happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
twodot posted:Punishments carried out can not be revoked. Time can not be undone. The death penalty is bad, but not because it is uniquely irrevocable. You're equating revoked with stopped. Death is uniquely irrevocable because you can't end death. You can end a prison sentence.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
twodot posted:Yes, and? Someone is in prison, we possess the capability of stopping their sentence. We let them out of prison, at which point we lose the capability of stopping their sentence. Is letting them out a good idea? Of course it is, which means that the ability of a punishment to be stopped isn't a useful thing to talk about. Friend, you're attempting to show off your logic judo but in the process you've just managed to tie your legs in knots and punch yourself in the groin. At this point you're not making sense. It is a good thing to stop a wrong punishment. This can be done with a prison sentence, but not with a carried-out death sentence. The ability of a punishment to be stopped is useful to talk about because you have innocent people in prison who would very much like their punishment to be stopped. I'd sincerely love to see you tell them to their faces that their desire to have their punishment stopped "isn't a useful thing to talk about." OwlFancier posted:However, the idea that we are somehow significantly ethically better for not killing people and instead merely irreparably ruining their lives with long term imprisonment, is an indulgent fantasy, both are so far beyond the pale that the distinction seems rather moot. Neither can be made amends for, and 'making an attempt' in the latter case counts for nothing. Save perhaps to make you feel better. It is better not to kill an innocent person than to kill them = an indulgent fantasy. Got it. Go tell people who are working to release wrongfully imprisoned people and their clients that it counts for nothing. This is some seriously laughable thinking here. It's almost like some people care more about maintaining an internally consistent faux-logical argument than helping people! Sharkie fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jan 2, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
twodot posted:You aren't paying attention. You can't stop the prison sentence of someone out of prison. You can't stop the payment of a fine that's already been paid. We shouldn't evaluate the justness of punishments on the basis of whether or not they can be stopped. You can prevent them from serving the remainder of their sentence, which is not possible for with an executed person. We recognize that the justice system can make mistakes, so it's better to make a mistake which can be ended than one that can't. Yes it sucks that we can't rewind time to make the lost years never exist, but it's better to mistakenly take away 10 years of a person's life than to take away every year of life they could ever have. Nude Bog Lurker posted:Honestly, at this point I'm just trying to work out what you actually think. twodot posted:What? I've directly stated what I actually think multiple times. The death penalty is bad, but not because it is uniquely irrevocable (all carried out punishments can not be undone). You're trying to corner me into a poorly constructed logic trap, for reasons I don't understand. Your entire argument isn't even about the death penalty, really. It's the ethical and logical equivalent of a physics student going up to engineers working on a project, and telling them it's not satisfying to you because they aren't following the formulas you've used that involve perfect frictionless spheres. OwlFancier posted:Death penalty in general, your choice is between decades of what amounts to torture, or death, because the former is far better than the latter, apparently. So you're saying it doesn't matter if people are wrongfully executed, because otherwise they'll still have served time in prison? Talk about unconvincing arguments!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:49 |
|
|
twodot is meeting with Sam, a prisoner, talking to each other over phones between a window of bulletproof glass. Sam says "so, you think you can get me out of here, now that the DNA evidence has exonerated me?" twodot presses a hand-drawn logic tree against the glass and starts shouting "What does it matter?" and babbling about infinite regression, saying "I can never get you out, really, without a time machine..." Sam hangs up and walks off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 00:48
|
|