I replied on a work break without a KB so my reply was briefer than I would have fully liked.
So, there’s this problem of free will… I kind of don’t believe in it, but I think I personally need and we socially need the concept of personal accountability to function, at the very least because social sanctions and social repercussion DO effect behavior.
At the same time, though, we do make allowances for intent and circumstances. A drunk driver will more likely get manslaughter than murder because the intent is there. An wife may get a lighter sentence for killing an abusive husband. I think we keep extending the totality of the circumstances to the persons entire life, we would be aiming more for rehabilitation than punishment, and I don’t see anything wrong with that. However, if someone is not rehabilitated and resocialized and can’t be trusted not to commit heinous crimes, then it makes sense to keep them locked up.
Not this time… your concern about accountability is a natural part of coming to grips with a universe without the free will we all grow up thinking we have.
Ok… Then I suppose my response is that I don’t really see what your response has to do at all with mine.
I actually agree that the idea of free will is at the very least unknowable leaning towards non-existent and whether we have it or not we get better outcomes when we act as if it does.
But my comment doesn’t concern free will, or at least it applies whether we think it exists or not. Morality and accountability are both social constructs and despite that they are about as important as anything when it comes to what we think is right for a person to do when they commit what we consider atrocities.
I think you’re retreating to a 10,000 ft philosophical view about free will and the subjective morality of the human condition and… I don’t really see how it applies or what the point is. Are you just assuming you’re educating someone about absurdism and stoicism? If that’s the case then I would encourage you to take the walk back down the mountain. As you understand philosophy you must come to grips with the fact that at the end of the day we’re all left facing the messy, amoral milieu that we live our lives in and we are able to affect. Despite our acceptance of the empty boats that plague us we still face their consequences and live short lives in a short-lived society that we are able to improve.
My idea was to apply a little compassion and understanding to a real-world situation. Growing up in a hot-house conservative Christianity systematically programs you to think in certain ways, ways that you’d be less likely to chose for yourself as a rational adult.
Thinking about the scopes of free will that we do have is a way to limit our monkey-brain desire for VENGEANCE for people who make the WRONG choices. Maybe this guy was not free, in any real way, to choose not to be a total conversion therapy dickbag, so maybe we shouldn’t desire to punish him… and that’s where our conversation started, not on a mountain, but with this very real situation.
That’s why this is confusing and non-sequiter. You replied to someone asking whether he had made amends with his victims. That’s not a desire for VENGEANCE, that’s not even necessarily a punishment if he has the right attitude, and it most definitely doesn’t imply that they don’t think the guy was a product of his upbringing and culture. So all of these replies are just bizarre in context.
I replied on a work break without a KB so my reply was briefer than I would have fully liked.
So, there’s this problem of free will… I kind of don’t believe in it, but I think I personally need and we socially need the concept of personal accountability to function, at the very least because social sanctions and social repercussion DO effect behavior.
At the same time, though, we do make allowances for intent and circumstances. A drunk driver will more likely get manslaughter than murder because the intent is there. An wife may get a lighter sentence for killing an abusive husband. I think we keep extending the totality of the circumstances to the persons entire life, we would be aiming more for rehabilitation than punishment, and I don’t see anything wrong with that. However, if someone is not rehabilitated and resocialized and can’t be trusted not to commit heinous crimes, then it makes sense to keep them locked up.
I think you replied to the wrong comment again lol.
Not this time… your concern about accountability is a natural part of coming to grips with a universe without the free will we all grow up thinking we have.
Ok… Then I suppose my response is that I don’t really see what your response has to do at all with mine.
I actually agree that the idea of free will is at the very least unknowable leaning towards non-existent and whether we have it or not we get better outcomes when we act as if it does.
But my comment doesn’t concern free will, or at least it applies whether we think it exists or not. Morality and accountability are both social constructs and despite that they are about as important as anything when it comes to what we think is right for a person to do when they commit what we consider atrocities.
I think you’re retreating to a 10,000 ft philosophical view about free will and the subjective morality of the human condition and… I don’t really see how it applies or what the point is. Are you just assuming you’re educating someone about absurdism and stoicism? If that’s the case then I would encourage you to take the walk back down the mountain. As you understand philosophy you must come to grips with the fact that at the end of the day we’re all left facing the messy, amoral milieu that we live our lives in and we are able to affect. Despite our acceptance of the empty boats that plague us we still face their consequences and live short lives in a short-lived society that we are able to improve.
My idea was to apply a little compassion and understanding to a real-world situation. Growing up in a hot-house conservative Christianity systematically programs you to think in certain ways, ways that you’d be less likely to chose for yourself as a rational adult.
Thinking about the scopes of free will that we do have is a way to limit our monkey-brain desire for VENGEANCE for people who make the WRONG choices. Maybe this guy was not free, in any real way, to choose not to be a total conversion therapy dickbag, so maybe we shouldn’t desire to punish him… and that’s where our conversation started, not on a mountain, but with this very real situation.
I’m not really into stoicism or absurdism.’
That’s why this is confusing and non-sequiter. You replied to someone asking whether he had made amends with his victims. That’s not a desire for VENGEANCE, that’s not even necessarily a punishment if he has the right attitude, and it most definitely doesn’t imply that they don’t think the guy was a product of his upbringing and culture. So all of these replies are just bizarre in context.