|
I've been on a philosophy kick as of late, but being the massive nerd that I am I've been reading the Blackwell pop culture and philosophy books. One of the recent ones I have read was “Dungeons and Dragons and Philosophy.” They aren't so much saying that pop culture is philosophical, but rather that they are using examples from pop culture. So in the first essay they discuss the nature of evil and free will. The use an example of a creature of pure evil, cooked up in the abyss, an abomination of flesh, and wings, and horns, set to terrorize the planes. But this creature is intelligent also, it has a mind, it has thoughts, it has feeling. It is also evil by definition. And generally speaking, being evil in this world sucks. For such a creature, wouldn’t it be the case that it is MORE deserving of pity because it undeniably had no choice on whether or not to be evil. The essay expands on this concept. We know so much of our behavior comes from chemical reactions in our mind, our genetics, and our environment. We can’t blame the demon for being a demon, and we also can’t blame someone to blame for their behavior if they could not have acted any differently. Our bodies are physical objects, governed by physical laws of chemistry and physics, we are in many ways, machines. Our brains are chemical computers, acting out programing. From the book quote:The Roman philosopher Lucretius (99– 55 bce) wrote in his On the Nature of the Universe, “If all motion is always one long chain, and new motion arises out of the old in order invariable … whence comes this free will?” If I decide to do something irresponsible, like ditching work to play video games, it would have been impossible for me to choose otherwise, the structure of my brain and body made that happen. If we also consider a being with perfect information, it should follow that all of our actions are predetermined. Someone who can see the future, already knows what choices we will make, and therefore, our choices are already made. But what does this mean? I asked if we could have sympathy for monsters. We have prisons filled to the brim with people who have committed unconscionable acts. Some wind up in there of stupid bullshit like marijuana but they are in there with people who have killed people while invading their homes, sexually preyed upon children, or taken lives for the pettiest of reasons. If those people have not truly chosen what they did, if the pedophile has some sickness, if the thief was raised in dire poverty and grew up to believe he needed to take to get ahead, can we justly say that they deserve to suffer. That is not to say that they should not suffer at all or not be locked up as a deterrent or for the safety of the community. But locking people in windowless concrete boxes, allowing them to be raped, creating an environment of daily terror and dog eat dog interpersonal politics, or complaining that inmates can watch TV or read books, it doesn’t seem to me like that is a useful form of suffering but rather a suffering for the sake of suffering. If one accepts that we live in a deterministic universe, it would seem to me that we should have compassion for those who have committed even appalling crimes. But can we? Even if someone is beyond the ability for us to rehabilitate or reprogram, like an ax murderer or a psychopath, shouldn’t we avoid making their living conditions so torturous that we behave in a way that we should condemn?
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
Yeah thats what gets me, it is such a common attitude to see people saying that pedophiles should be tortured, maimed, or fed to other inmates. That's not okay.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Rape, assault, and cannibalism are all crimes and should not be allowed. But when it comes to psychopaths I have no problem locking them up and throwing away the key. They are not human, and do not deserve to be treated as such. How are psychopaths not human? And sure we might lock them up for long or even life sentences if they have committed a crime but that doesn't mean they are beyond compassion
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
The forums would not let me put scare quotes in the thread title
Mandy Thompson fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Mar 19, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:On the other hand, is killing or otherwise victimizing people wrong in the first place? There are so many of them; too many really. Obviously I don't want to be raped and/or murdered, but from an objective standpoint what's the net effect of, say, some random kid being violently and painfully killed? What's the environmental externality this potential person would have inflicted on the world? What would he really have accomplished in a lifetime of gorging on cheap calories, mindless consumerism and unfulfilling relationships? What if, god forbid, he or she should have children? And, in the long run, and with the impenetrable loneliness of the human condition, does it matter what pains or indignities this putative person suffered in his or her moments or hours of being dispatched? Not in any tangible sense. Maybe we should rethink the harm, or indeed the value of the "monsters, ax murders, and pedophiles" of society. If one doesn't hold the value of not victimizing people or taking human lives to be self-evident, I guess there is always the notion of the social contract. You certainly don't want to be murdered, neither do I. Lets agree not to do that to each other.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
I probably wouldn't kill a mugger or a burglar but I can understand and feel sympathy for those that do. I should hope the burglar or mugger knows that if they continue on that life path, someone will kill them. Its not so much that it is just, but it is a natural consequence of doing something dangerous in a country full of concealed carry permits.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:
We also seem to have it ingrained in our social contract that someone's home is his or hercastle and intruders breaking in are forfeiting their lives.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Blue Raider posted:just execute throughly proven murderers one month past their sentencing and castrate convicted rapists. who cares, gently caress em Strictly speaking we're not suppose to sentence people at all unless they are thoroughly proven though, even if its for shoplifting or burglary. But either way, doesn't it seem a little messed up to cause suffering to someone who could not have acted any differently.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
Blue Raider posted:like my functional example is that texan farmer who killed the dude he caught molesting his daughter. that was good, and right, and good on him for having the stones to be a man about it I don't know about the specific example you are referring to, did he find the molester in the act and kill him or did he do it later?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Blue Raider posted:he caught him in the act and beat him to death While I wouldn't call it heroic, I can't really fault him for it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:In a strongly deterministic universe it seems pointless to talk about ethics. Well, not so fast. No we don't really choose, but in having this conversation, which is the result of determinism, we could form a policy that reduces suffering. I certainly would prefer to live in a world with less suffering overall. If goodness forbid I went mad and committed a serious crime, or just made a mistake and committed a minor one, I would want to be treated with dignity at the very least. There but for the grace of God go all of us.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:We could have compassion for them, but why bother? I don't really see any benefit in it. Well let me ask you this, what is the benefit in punishing them?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:It is just, and makes people happy. What's just about it? And it certainly doesn't make EVERYone happy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
When I think of people in jail, I think of this Richard Pryor routine. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xc501v_richard-pryor-on-arizona-penitentia_shortfilms If you stand up for the rights of prisoners, you have to be willing to recognize that you are going to be standing up for some people who have done some horrible things and chances are have personality disorders and derangements. The thing we have to be willing to say is that human dignity is non-negotiable. That doesn't mean we let these people out. But we do treat them with dignity while they are there. Rape of anyone is unacceptable. Torture of anyone is unaceptable. These are inherently evil acts regardless of who they are done to.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Sorry, I don't think anyone capable of murder is capable of reforming. The question isn't about whether or not they can be reformed, the question is about brutality on our own end.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2015 05:08
|
|