Luh-vely. Every one of those people is worthy of being loved. With being treated with respect. And if any one of them were ever at my door, I would treat them no differently than any other person. I would invite them in, offer them something to eat and sit down to talk for awhile. Most people are incapable of seeing past certain things, but I am not one of those people. Some may say, "Hitler deserves respect?!?" and my response would be that he indeed does because he is a human just like any other human. Capable of mistakes and judging other people, the difference is that he convinced an entire population of people to believe what he believed. Perhaps if, like Nietzche, he found a beauty in the jews than it would not have happened. Perhaps, if people had always treated him with kindness and respect than he would have never became the monster. I can't stand wes morris postings, but were I to meet him I would not treat him poorly because of what he has said. If you greet someone with a smile and open arms, it tends to bring out the best in them too. I am one person. But I am one person that can effect those around me. I can choose my disposition as easily as I can choose my attitude, and I choose to love those around me. It makes things easier for them, and likewise for me.
I would still treat them with respect. I would not dance at their sentencing, I would not celebrate justice being served. They must be held accountable for their crimes and be punished for them, but they should still be treated humanely. I suppose duendy, that I would threat them the same way I treated the man who physically abused me for five years. I do not speak poorly of him, and when I have seen him I have greeted him with a hug and a smile despite his past errs. He served his time. I would see them punished but find it tragic that someone would have those kinds of feeling and hatred towards another human being. Sociopaths and criminals do not become that way overnight, nor are they born that way. It's their enviroment, their upbringing, and the way people have treated them that causes such things. Not that it excuses their behaviour one bit, just that I do not wish to be a part of that cycle of hate.
Sorry to say, squirelly, but thats kinda messed up. they need to be held accountable for their actions, and need to be permanently stopped from becoming a menace to society again. lock 'em up and throw away the key, as they used to say.
You haven't shown that it ever does get cut off from sensual experience. it amy not be a sense many of us possess, but that does not mean it isn't sensual. Nobody's perfect.
What would be difficult about it? Karl Popper, whose ideas i use, called his autobiography Unended Quest. Look for something else. By the very nature it is an unended and unending quest, so there's no need to worry. Even if we did find it we wouldn't know we had. Eh? I don't think Rossetti, Jowett or Beerbohm were members of a secret society, or separate secret societies.
no, you said that you'd treat them with respect. they dont deserve respect, they're criminals. they did something that was obsiously wrong, and require punishment and meager meals. and no toilets. prisons these days are far too hospitable.
Just to clarify, Hapsburg. The above is what I said in my post. And, the study of anthropology tells us that if we treat a man like an animal, he will begin to act like an animal. Being imprisoned is punishment enough for their crimes, but to further demean them by not feeding them and taking away their toilets would turn them into a worse criminal than when they went in. Then we would get to release them on society, more animalistic and more prone to criminal behaviour because of that. I do not believe that prison can rehabilitate people, because they rate of recidivism is well over 80%. But we can do our best to not turn them into more of a monster than our society already has.
I like the equal-penalty+. Murder someone and you're toast with a little suffering for reflection. Rape someone and you're taking it up the ass by a prison mob. Steal something and you're stuff disappears. Knowing that the negative consequences of a crime will be in line with the crime itse'f is a powerful deterrent... of course there are positive reinforcement methods that could also be used in conjunction.
Ayn Rand is a little off base. She believes we can all be trusted to make objective selfish decisions. She holds humans in too high regard. Besides, Roark could never have done what he did without the cooperation of tons of people, and compromise. Rand treated compromise like a dirty word.
As the cliche goes Hapsburg, one of the definitions of insanity is to try the same thing in the same way, and expect a different result. Long sentences and harsh treatment may be politically popular, and satisfy our cultures punitive urge, but there is precious little evidence that the "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mentality has made the law abiding any safer. These tactics might keep you from committing crimes, but who cares? I strongly suspect that you aren't a criminal. Those who commit serious crimes think differently from the rest of us. Sometimes I think some on the political right get so much satisfaction from thinking about the suffering of criminals, that the fact that it is actually counterproductive to the goal of decreasing crime and increasing public safety is irrelevant. A liberal is a conservative who just got put in jail; a conservative is a liberal who just got mugged. - unknown Any pretense towards an actual effort to rehabilitate most criminals has been abandoned for some time. It is time to divorce societies desire for revenge from our treatment of criminals, and to listen to the advice of experts in human behavior.
okay. changing viewpoint: the gov't should try to rehabilitate them, not neccisarily "punish" them, at least not harshly.
SO much naiveity abounding here. ...look, the biggest fkin criminals are the ones in the suits controlling and dominating and oppressing. their shit makes many of the 'criminals' actions (and i am talking about the relatively small percentage who are victim oriented) nearly pale into insignificance!...and thats understatement and Thersites.......you say i haven't demonstrated how materialistic scientists arer NOt sensual. Well you obviously aren't savvy with the demands of the scientific method are you?...yu know--what CAN'T be measured, and all that, dont get a look in, or feel in?
As i pointed out the pleasure of scientific discovery is undoubtedly sensual for people who can appreciate it. Even if it were xclusively intellectual that would not preclude other pleasures. I pointed out that Wilson- and Darwin too- began with pure curiosity and the pleasures of beetle-hunting and moved to science form that.
And as i've already said, i am not disputing that. As i woldn't that you can also get pleasure from reading a book, which can be thought of as intellectual--reading lines of letters, left to right,or right to left, etc., if Oriental but sensual potential is a continuum all the way to deepest ecstasy, where feeling becomes so overwhelmingly intense that the idea of reading words, or 'doing science' would seem superfluous when you are in drooling awe, and/or spiritually exploring other dimensions
