Cruelty implies intention, so if you brainwash to remove all intention there would sure enough be no more cruelty; pain is then achieved mindlessly. By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. (Dhammapada Vs. 165) To control a system you need to know more about the system than it knows about itself.
Reminds me of, A Clockwork Orange. After the gang leader's inherent violence is brainwashed out of him, he gets attacked by a couple of cops that happen to be his old gang members.
If it's done in a manner forced upon people without their consent, then I don't think it's justifiable. However if it can be done in a democratic way where the general population will endorse the systematic removal of cruelty in the human race, then I think you might be able to justify it. Afterall, who would vote against such a bad trait? I guess the purists will argue that we wouldn't be human anymore.
If a person is convicted of committing some crime, I do not think it would be terrible to use brainwashing techniques instead of imprisonment or execution. If you think it is ok to put somebody in prison for 5 or more years, is it so much worse to take a few months to brainwash him and turn him loose? The above assumes that we know enough about brainwashing to assure that it is effective and has no bad unintended consequences. On this issue I have serious doubts.
The problem with brainwashing (which I am against) is who decides what the norms are. Also it should be noted that brainwashing is not a hypothesised future phenomenon but rather a reality today and throughout history. Look at you own life and the processes whereby you make decisions...
Brains at large are far too dirty for anybody sensible to wish to soil their hands on the attempt to wash them.
Interesting thread. Would you suggest using brainwashing as a form of punishment or rehabilitation so they no longer to commit violent or cruel acts towards humans or animals? Or would this be used as a preventative measure over everyone in society to ensure violent crime never happened? If it were to become the 'norm', it would be a very powerful tool in the hands of those who were in power. Everyone would want for an end to violent crimes against others, be they human or animals. But where would we draw the line? If it were used as a rehabilitative tool for example, then it might have some merit, but it does not always work as some people are resistant to any form of control. The moral and social implications arise if it were used over the general population as a preventative measure. Everyone has angry and sometimes violent thoughts. You get them while driving, when someone steals your parking spot, when someone cuts in front of you in a line at the supermarket. But the great majority never act out on those thoughts. Should we stifle's people's emotions through the use of tools such as brainwashing just in case some decide to act out on said thoughts? And as fish has pointed out, who would decide what the norms actually are. That is one of the main reasons why brain washing of any kind should never be implemented by the state as a form of control over the population or the criminal elements within it.
Psychopaths wouldn't want to end it. Who's gonna' look out for their rights? But a few do. And it only takes a few to ruin it for everyone. Psychopaths love acting on their violent thoughts. As an attorney, Bells, are you gonna' watch out for their rights as psychopaths? If not, why not? I mean, on another thread around here, you're adamantly protecting the rights of thieves and burglars, right? So surely you wouldn't want psychopaths to suffer at the hands of society, would you? Baron Max
Are you stalking me? Like vince, you are obsessed with my profession. It is a tad worrying and disturbing Baron. As to what I think of thieves and criminals, I'd suggest you re-read what I had said in the other thread. And this time slowly with both eyes open and your brain actually reading and comprehending the words written down. Would you want to be brainwashed so that you never act out in anger? It would of course mean an end to your ever using your salt loaded shot gun to shoot at children. Do you think the State should have direct control over your every thought or emotion in such a way? Brainwashing psychopaths has its merits (as a form of rehabilitation) as well as being something we should fear. In the wrong hands, it could do more harm then good.
Ever read the book? The book has an extra little bit on the end compared to the movie. The movie pans out with young Alex "cured, my brothers," leaving the impression that the rampage was about to begin. True horrorshow. In the book, Young Alex grows up and grows out of his childish ways. He learns a lesson, in other words. Interesting that Kubrick didn't think this self-improvement would go over well with American audiences. He was probably right, too. The hippies of the time were anything but disciplined. They would have preferred Alex go off another murdering and raping spree rather than 'submit to the man'.
I wouldn't consider 6655321 to be a product of actual brainwashing- he was physically conditioned to be unable to commit violence. He wanted to cause hurt, but the physical revulsion he had to violent thoughts prevented him from doing it. The story had a strong moral message- goodness comes from within. Alex's conditioning made it so he was unable to committ violent acts. It even made him sick to think violent thoughts- thoughts he wanted to think. It did not convince him that violence was wrong. Alex's morality was a mechanical and forced construct, not an actual change of heart. Thus the title, A Clockwork Orange.
Recommended book: 'Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control' by Kathleen Taylor Neuroscience and social psychological approach to the subject: Tackles the usual suspects: religion, cults, politics, media, education, advertising, mental health, criminal justice, domestic violence, torture, etc. Also explores the brain activity - no direct evidence of brainwashing as that research is unethical - she shows that the brain is malleable and the techniques of the brainwashers e.g. victim/predator Interesting and informative...accessible for non-biologists.
Asides from the classic problem of misuse of such device... Violence is not its own cause; It's rather the endresult of a long chain of events. Usually some type of frustration over the emptiness of ones own life, or the lives of others. Or maybe dissatisfaction over the powers that be. No-one goes on a bloody rampage "just because". It's not some kind of Evil That Comes From Without, a demonic force that possesses someone to kill, like "The Devil Made Me Do It!" Violence is not just something that happens without a reason, a primordial instict to kill all living things and eat their organs. Hence stopping it at that level is both stupid and pointless. When people resort to violence, things are already wrong. To prove further how violence is educating, lets hear some excuses: a) "He had it coming" b) "That ought to teach him" c) "Just taught him a little lesson" d) "He deserved it" e) "ought to know better than..." You can't kill a murderer without becoming a murderer; You can't kill Evil without becoming Evil.
