Punishment

People seek, in such a deep sense, the desire for retribution over errs and heresy.

I have felt a desire for vengeance.

Why is punishment so satisfying?

Speaking in evolutionary terms, I suspect that the emotional satisfaction associated from seeking retribution evolved as a mechanism for preventing individuals from being exploited by others. Generally speaking, a "bad actor" will think twice about harming someone who is likely to seek retribution.

Reply to Shawn “What is the deeper point towards punishment”? — In my opinion, “negative reinforcement”; by associating something negative, or undesirable, with a given act, one will, usually, cease to commit that action due to their aversion of the consequences accompanying it. Very simply put, the dog learns to stop going to the bathroom in the house only ‘cause of its aversion to the negative consequences accompanying such an act, e.g., shouting, being put in a cage or timeout, spanking, etc.,; without that, it would continue in its way without any inhibition.

Quoting Theorem

Speaking in evolutionary terms, I suspect that the emotional satisfaction associated from seeking retribution evolved as a mechanism for preventing individuals from being exploited by others

There seems more to it than that, in my view. I think of punishment as a relic of evolutionary rudimentary psychology. Ask me why.

Quoting aRealidealist

In my opinion, “negative reinforcement”; by associating something negative, or undesirable, with a given act, one will, usually, cease to commit that action due to their aversion of the consequences accompanying it.

But, does this have to be demonstrated in act only?

Reply to Shawn Why?

Quoting Shawn

When someone does something wrong, we feel as though they should be punished. What is the deeper point towards punishment if everyone mostly feels it is wrong.

Everyone doesn't think it's wrong. The deeper point for it, and for all you want to know and more and retributive justice:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-retributive/

Quoting Theorem

Why?

Animals punish each-other without end. It's so typical that's it's almost primitive...

Quoting Hanover

Everyone doesn't think it's wrong.

You accept punishment, willingly?

Reply to Shawn ”But, does this have to be demonstrated in act only?” —... for beings without a higher cognition, like dogs or other animals, I would say, yes. For example, you can’t explain, in principle, to a dog why going to the bathroom in the house is bad, e.g., due to germs/potential illnesses from it, uncleanliness, odor, so one can only execute a demonstrable negative consequence in action, as a response to their undesirable behavior, if you want to establish a negative association in their minds, which should arouse their aversion or inhibition to committing that action again.

Yet for beings of a higher cognition, like humans past adolescence, not necessarily. For example, the consequence of “hell” or an “underworld” is indemonstrable on earth, it as an ultimate consequence to certain kinds of actions cannot be demonstrated on earth; & yet it has prevented plenty of people from committing certain kinds of actions due to the conceived or imagined threat of it, even if its consequence has never been demonstrated to follow from those certain kinds of actions.

So, in my opinion, negative consequences have to be demonstrated in response to undesirable behaviors for beings without a higher cognition; yet not necessarily for beings with a higher cognition, as they can conceive or imagine of certain kinds of consequences without these actually ever being demonstrated as such.

Quoting aRealidealist

So, in my opinion, negative consequences have to be demonstrated in response to undesirable behaviors for beings without a higher cognition; yet not necessarily for beings with a higher cognition, as they can conceive or imagine of certain kinds of consequences without these actually ever being demonstrated as such.

Yes.

Reply to Shawn LOL :lol:

Quoting aRealidealist

LOL :lol:

How do you explain behavior that takes place in spite of understatement of its negative consequence for both parties involved?

Reply to Shawn If you can you give an example of such a scenario, I’m sure that I’d be able to better answer your question.

Quoting aRealidealist

If you can you give example of such a scenario, I’m sure that I’d be able to better answer your question.

A theft? A murder? By definition, any *crime*.

Reply to Shawn Ok. but what function does punishment play among animals? Presumably it provides some utility or it wouldn't have evolved. The question, then, becomes whether it provides any utility within the realm of human society and culture, or whether it can safely be discarded. For my part, I'm not convinced it can be discarded because I do think the threat of punishment deters many people from doing terrible things. That said, I think some temperaments respond better to punishment than others, and so the use of punishment could be better modulated within society than it currently is.

Quoting Theorem

The question, then, becomes whether it provides any utility within the realm of human society and culture, or whether it can safely be discarded.

My assumption, is that it can be disposed with, but... unfortunately, things will be acted upon, and unfortunately, have to be dealt with. I just think that re-distributive justice has taken an extreme form lately.

What you are perceiving as "punishment" may not be primarily a punishment.

If a person murders and is sent to prison...is that "punishment" or is it simply removal from society in order to protect those the offender has not already murdered?

Quoting Frank Apisa

If a person murders and is sent to prison...is that "punishment" or is it simply removal from society in order to protect those the offender has not already murdered?

Good question. I think it's perceived as punishment in the least, to every party involved. Whilst, the act may be intended towards different consequences.

Punishment seems to spring from anger to me.

Quoting Andrew4Handel

Punishment seems to spring from anger to me.

And what else, resentment? I can't stand the idea honestly.

Reply to Shawn It might also come from the just world fallacy and the fundamental attribution error where people subconsciously believe life is fair and people are to blame when things go wrong.

I do think people can be malicious can be to blame but I still don't want to harm another person as retribution.

Quoting Andrew4Handel

It might also come from the just world fallacy and the fundamental attribution error where people subconsciously believe life is fair and people are to blame when things go wrong.

I do think people can be malicious can be to blame but I still don't want to harm another person as retribution.

I think you're onto something. Do go on.

I think the US is so incredibly obsessed with punishment, that I'm honest to God afraid for people who make mistakes in it.

Reply to Shawn I guess that I would it explain by saying that the perpetrator doesn’t view/experience the consequence as being something negative, or just doesn’t know, ahead of time, what negative consequence(s) will accompany his action(s), i.e., either by impudence or ignorance.

For example, one steals another’s car & sells it, now they may not view/experience this as being something negative but rather positive ‘cause of how it monetarily benefited them, so they’ll proceed in committing such a “criminal action”; but, say, if they were to get arrested & lose more money in legal fees than they originally gained by selling that stolen car, which wasn’t expected, & if they were to knew that this would’ve happened ahead of time, then they most likely wouldn’t have committed such an action in the first place.

So, I guess, that’s how I would explain a perpetrator’s crime in relation to an either unexpressed or understated negative consequence; either in it not being not something which is viewed/experienced as expressly negative, i.e., impudence, or in it not being known that something negative will be a consequence of it, i.e., ignorance.

Reply to Shawn I feel that punishment comes from peoples fear including a fear of lacking control in an uncertain world. People attempt to make the world seem more just by inventing a system of values and justice to validate their actions and beliefs.

I believe that it is pathological and artificial.

Some of it has been informed by religion and superstition and enforced by those with the most power to justify their power or simply hold onto it.

Quoting aRealidealist

So, I guess, that’s how I would explain a perpetrator’s crime in relation to an either unexpressed or understated negative consequence; either in it not being not something which is viewed/experienced as expressly negative, i.e., impudence, or in it not being known that something negative will be a consequence of it, i.e., ignorance.

Is it really the experience, or knowledge or lack-thereof? If people knew how many people actually DON'T get away with crimes, things would shift so dramatically.

Quoting Andrew4Handel

People attempt to make the world seem more just by inventing a system of values and justice to validate their actions and beliefs.

Oh my fucking God, what a travesty. If I die, it will be with a smile on my face that this world was corrupted by the insane.

Quoting Shawn

When someone does something wrong, we feel as though they should be punished.

Who is this we? And what is wrong? And this desire to punish, is that the only reason it happens?

Life punishes us. The choices we make come back to us hard and fast. It is a luxury if one can buffer the results. But nobody rides free.

Quoting Valentinus

Life punishes us. The choices we make come back to us hard and fast. It is a luxury if one can buffer the results. But nobody rides free.

What a bunch of baloney. Life punishes us? Really? What does that even mean?

Reply to Shawn “If people knew how many people actually DON'T get away with crimes, things would shift so dramatically.” — Exactly my point, only if people KNEW, then things would change, but they don’t, i.e., they’re ignorant of the improbability of getting away, so they proceed with their action(s) in ignorance of what’s more than likely going to come their way; but, again, if they did know, most of them would’ve never tried to commit what they did.

If you wake up and cannot feed your family, that is life.

Reply to aRealidealist

Quoting Valentinus

If you wake up and cannot feed your family, that is life.

I think it boils down to retaliation towards some perceived threat. I mean by this, even inaction.

Is that theater completely separated from the options people have in dire circumstances?

Quoting Valentinus

Is that theater completely separated from the options people have in dire circumstances?

I don't think they feel like they have a choice at some point.

Reply to Shawn Unfortunately it is an issue of power. Europeans have quite a liberal and progressive justice system. There are always people fighting to make a more humane society.

I am from England but I have often despaired about The States justice system.

Is there a better gathering of people who feel like they do have a choice?

Reply to Shawn “I think it boils down to retaliation towards some perceived threat” — Right, as I’ve said in my first post, “negative reinforcement”, or just a negative reaction; &, sure, this can include inaction or a negation of one’s ability to do certain things, as this is case with the “‘holding’ cells” of jail or prison.

Quoting Valentinus

Is there a better gathering of people who feel like they do have a choice?

Relative to what? Are we talking in absolutes here?

Defining a crime is controversial. Inequality, poverty, exploitation, religious indoctrination, excessive wealth, environmental damage and many other things are crimes in my book and create societies which are dysfunctional and the vulnerable are penalised

Quoting aRealidealist

“holding cells” of jail or prison.

:cry:

What a crazy world. The fact that no better alternative can be entertained as a correctional implementation is enough to negate the just world theory.

Reply to Shawn I don’t agree with that, as I believe in the maxim of, “you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone.” So that, in principle, the most effective way to make a person appreciate, or at least miss, a certain thing, is to deprive them of it. Although I don’t deny that the justice system has or can quite unjustly impose such a consequence onto some people; nonetheless, there are times when it’s justified & has the desired effect.

Quoting aRealidealist

Although I don’t deny that the justice system has or can quite unjustly impose such a consequence onto some people; nonetheless, there are times when it’s justified & has the desired effect.

Desired??? By whom? God on his almighty throne? Or some judge?

reply="Shawn;411160"]
You presented the idea that punishment is an elective on some level. It could be not selected.

All the serious attempts to advance that idea keep coming up against the problem of equality in opportunity and treatment under bodies of Law.

I am all for advancing the discussion but reject the notion it is not something we have been struggling with for a long time.

Reply to Shawn


If you want to have laws then you have to have enforcement.

So do you prefer anarchy or some form of retribution?

Quoting Valentinus

I am all for advancing the discussion but reject the notion it is not something we have been struggling with for a long time.

Then why do we still struggle with it so badly? Is there any room for progress?

Quoting A Seagull

So do you prefer anarchy or some form of retribution?

I do not know. I simply reject this current system of punishment and law-abridgment.

Reply to Shawn Perhaps by the victim; or by people in a society who’ve agreed on upholding “social contracts”, that is, in order to be a citizen of the state, you’ve already agreed to uphold certain rules, & you’ll suffer the consequence(s) for it if you violate said rules. So that such a punishment, in making you reevaluate your appreciation of what was taken from you, will prevent you from repeatedly committing such an act, in fear of being again deprived of what was taken from you.

Reply to aRealidealist

How can that world in our modern-world with 1000's of laws to abide by?

Reply to Shawn What? Can you please rephrase the question. Do you mean, “WORK in our modern-world with 1000's of laws to abide by”?

Quoting aRealidealist

What? Can you please rephrase the question.

I don't understand the point of a social contract in a society that has thousands of laws to abide by.

Quoting Shawn

Then why do we still struggle with it so badly? Is there any room for progress?

If you excuse me taking a step back for a moment, yesterday I was watching David Attenborough's amazing nature commentaries, this one about two musk oxen, a ton each, running at each other's heads at 15mph. That is like falling off a bicycle and hitting your head on the ground at 30mph. After each head-on assault, the two beasts stood dazed for a moment, and one could not help but wonder why they continued at all. Then Mr. Attenborough quietly explained, if they did not carry on keeping their heads pointed at each other, then one would run into the other's flank and rip it open, possibly lethally.

I thought about that quite a bit. It seems to me a biological explanation is not as simple as most make out. Taking that weve not shown ourselves much more evolved than musk oxen, despite advanced intellect, one reaches a new conclusion. It is protection from *future abuse of the herd* that is the DRIVE for the emotion of revenge. However, we perceive it as a direct personal need for revenge for oneself, because our brains are wired for extreme egocentrism.

Regarding justification for revenge, it's been rather clear from more advanced scientific research that current remedial systems often do NOT work as well as outright fear of of future reprisal. Not that fear of future of future reprisal works that well either, considering the high recidivism rate in this country. On the other hand, remedial systems SHOULD, theoretically, work best in the long term, if sufficient investment is put in them. So really it's the expense of making a remedial system thats the hurdle. Frequently stated is that the USA has more people in prison than anywhere else in the world, and more than in the Soviet Union during the height of its 'repression.' Together with other social factors, one is led to wonder whether the all-out commitment to freedom as a primary principal is actually that good for a society in total. However the worship of Goddess Liberty has been shown to produce more economic success, which means, however much the current system of punishment in the USA may not be as fair or as corrective as in other cultures, such as the Netherlands for example, its here to stay and we have to accept it for what it is, despite innumerable irratoinalities.

Reply to Shawn Sure, I don’t deny that modern “contractualist” states can over do it, but that’s not an objection to contractualism, per se; but just to how certain modern states have employed it, which I’m not against objecting to. So my point has more so to do with contractualism in principle, as opposed to how it’s practiced by certain states nowadays, which, again, I don’t deny that it can be, in these cases, unfair or downright corrupt.

Reply to Shawn
Your questions go in many directions. I am just another fool on the internet.
One way to think about it is how difficult it is to connect our experiences in the inside out form of our tiny minds to what is happening to other people. That was the template for thinkers like Foucault. Such thinkers did not provide an answer to your questions but did explain why they could not.

Quoting ernestm

However it has been shown to produce more economic success, which means, however much the current system of punishment in the USA may not be as fair or as corrective as in other cultures, such as the Netherlands for example, its here to stay and we have to accept it for what it is, despite innumerable irratoinalities.

Irrationality in the extreme if I may be so bold!

Quoting aRealidealist

Sure, I don’t deny modern “contractualist” states can over do it, but that’s not an objection to contractualism, per say, but just to how certain modern states have employed it, which I’m not against objecting to.

Contractual ism is wrong, should we be educating children about laws? They'll just grow up in fear.

Quoting Shawn

Irrationality in the extreme if I may be so bold!

maybe so. on the other hand, 'protection of the herd,' when it is as large as ours is now, does not lead to definitive, rational solutions either. I think it is fair to believe that society continually tries for something better, in a two-steps-forward, one-step-back sort of way. It doesnt seem a hopeless situation.

Quoting ernestm

It doesnt seem a hopeless situation.

Yet, the problem persists, and continues to persist. Should we just delve into some thought therapy, or hippocampus memory insertion?

Reply to Shawn Sure, not the technicalities of jurisprudence, but are you saying that children shouldn’t be taught rules of behavior & interaction at all? Moreover, this necessarily doesn’t imply fear but caution & moderation, which isn’t a bad thing.

Quoting aRealidealist

Sure, not technical laws of jurisprudence, but are you saying that children shouldn’t be taught rules of behavior & interaction at all? Moreover, this necessarily doesn’t imply fear but caution & moderation, which isn’t a bad thing.

I don't think teaching children about laws produces anything but neuroticism and fear and maladjustment disorders. It's all therapy at its core.

Reply to Shawn So you advise to teach children no rules for behavior & interaction? They should simply just act how they wish without any correction or consequence? As another person has already said, seems like you’re pushing for anarchy, which would create as much oppression or chaos, the physically strong ruling over the weak type of a scenario, as you claim that contractualism leads to.

Quoting aRealidealist

So you advise to teach children no rules for behavior & interaction? They should simply just act how they wish without any correction or consequence? As another person has already said, seems like you’re pushing for anarchy, which would create as much oppression or chaos, the physically strong ruling over the weak type of scenario, as you claim that contractualism leads to.

Not at all. It seems to me that punishment entails, self-punishment and reprisal in fear at such a young age, that we could get by without the whole ordeal to start with.

What is anxiety, but, not a form of self-punishment? Fear in the extreme.

Reply to Shawn “that we could get by without the whole ordeal to start with.” — When have you known this to be the case, if ever at all? Or is this just something that you imagine?

Quoting Shawn

Yet, the problem persists, and continues to persist. Should we just delve into some thought therapy, or hippocampus memory insertion?

Should we? omg! After a black gang shot my cat, and living in a very poor area at the time, the police just thought it funny. I have to say, I really wanted those kids in jail for life. Shooting at my house windows, that was another thing entirely. Thats up to me to defend myself. But shooting a pet cat, which has no defenses at all against it, that is beyond my ability to comprehend. Shock therapy, brain surgery, I dont know. Prison for life, definitely. What could a person do next after shooting my pet?

Im hoping you'll be aqble to tell me that with all the opinions you're learning, lol

Quoting aRealidealist

When have you known this to be the case, if ever at all?

Scandinavia has one of the most lax crime system ever, and they don't get away with a lot, neither in terms of taxation. Here in the US, it's such fucking lunacy, that I am baffled and wondering if I should move to Sweden.

Quoting ernestm

Should we? omg! After a black gang shot my cat, and living in a very poor area at thetime, the police just thought it funny. I have to say, I really wanted those kids in jail for life. Shooting at my house windows, that was another thing entirely. Thats up to me to defend myself. But shooting a pet cat, which has no defenses at all against it, that is beyond my ability to comprehend. Shock therapy, brain surgery, I dont know. Prison for life, definitely. What could a person do next after shooting my pet?

Oh my fucking God. Oh my fucking God!

I'm not talking about killing pet cats, fuck that shit.

Quoting Shawn

I'm not talking about killing pet cats, fuck that shit.

ok.

I used to be totally against the death penalty. Well as you guess I like animals and anture and stuff. So when I read that some people broke into a zoo and killed two white rhinos so they could take their horns, I changed my mind. I wrote the state attorney general saying they should enforce the death penalty for that. And guess what, they put a sign up at the local zoo saying that the state considered poaching wild animals in a zoo so heinous a crime it could resultin any punishment up to and including the death penalty. I guess I spoke for the state on that one.

I think there's one of those white rhinos left in the entire world. One.

Quoting ernestm

I think there's one of those white rhinos left in the entire world. One.

Yeah, people are repugnant. Some...

Quoting Shawn

Yeah, people are repugnant. Some...

Well here's how I deal with it. I think there are several species that look exactly the same and can interbreed. I dont know if its genetic, or environmental, or what, but I just dont think of them as the same species as me any more. It did work, thinking that way. I started feeling good about being a human being again. That's the extent I had to go to it, personally, on this problem.

Reply to ernestm

Luckily, we still are homo sapiens, despite such variance in psychology and sociological traits.

Quoting Shawn

Scandinavia has one of the most lax crime system ever, and they don't get away with a lot, neither in terms of taxation. Here in the US, it's such fucking lunacy, that I am baffled and wondering if I should move to Sweden.

This is the Swedish Fallacy, a logical fallacy I've discovered. It's the argument that since it works in Sweden, it can work anywhere. The truth is that everything works in Sweden. If they decided to turn their prisoners into legislators and to pay everyone to shit on the sidewalk, it would somehow increase the GNP.

Quoting Hanover

This is the Swedish Fallacy, a logical fallacy I've discovered. It's the argument that since it works in Sweden, it can work anywhere. The truth is that everything works in Sweden. If they decided to turn their prisoners into legislators and to pay everyone to shit on the sidewalk, it would somehow increase the GNP.

How do you explain the fact that it works, Hanny? It's all documented, researched, and backed by the Swedish krona.

Quoting Shawn

Luckily, we still are homo sapiens, despite such variance in psychology and sociological traits.

Well, not necessariily, havng studied psychology at Oxford, I can say having talked with Professor Richard Dawkins, author of "the selfish gene." There does APPEAR to be one speciies, even down to physiological structure; but there are differences in neural activity that divide Homo Sapiens into two main subspecies. Dawkins called them hawks and doves.

• In order to function successfully as predators, the hawks mimic the behavior and appearance of doves, but have no compassion, empathy, or any capacity for experiencing higher emotion beyond physical and sexual gratification. Hawks are usually solitary, although sometimes they hunt in packs
• The doves, on whom the hawks prey, have developed far more sophisticated mechanisms for even more than just higher emotions, because they enable more advanced ideas such as community support, knowledge sharing, and even training of hawks they have caught to work in packs and use in military conflicts.

The problem is, the two subspecies are not clearly separated by biochemical genetics alone. The theory is that there is a higher-order "social gene" that exists within the subconscious constructs of our minds, rather than the purely "biochemical gene" that exists in physical mechanics. And he wrote a book about it. Its pretty interesting )

Reply to ernestm

Wow man, thanks for that! I used to think psycho and sociopaths have no utility; but, they do prey in solitary confinement. The US is in love with hawks and eagles.

Quoting Shawn

The US is in love with hawks and eagles.

Yeah!

Quoting ernestm

Yeah!

How do you explain that? Why the obsession with all these birds of prey?

Quoting Shawn

How do you explain that? Why the obsession with all these birds of prey?

Are we like so insecure that we need these birds circling around all the time? Every national intelligence agency has some hawk in it in the US.

Quoting Shawn

Are we like so insecure that we need these birds circling around all the time? Every national intelligence agency has some hawk in it in the US.

Well, the best explanation I think Ive heard is that its the best way to contain them. Its better than prison. It doesnt need to be hawks and doves. Thats just what he chose to call them.

There is another thing. On which one bases ratoinal hope! The hawks cannot outnumber the doves, or the community in which they are hiding collapses from self destruction. Because there are always more doves in total, the total community always advances slowly, albeit not linearly. Two steps forward, one step back )

Reply to ernestm

What about frogs? They kinda just ribbit, and hide from eagles and hawks. Hehe.

A horse doesn't care... @unenlightened

Quoting Shawn

How do you explain the fact that it works, Hanny? It's all documented, researched, and backed by the Swedish krona.

Because their population is absurdly responsible and competent. Being a politician there is like coaching a team of all stars. They're going to win regardless of who's in charge.

Quoting Hanover

Because their population is absurdly responsible and competent. Being a politician there is like coaching a team of all stars. They're going to win regardless of who's in charge.

Wow, Hanny, that's very nice of you. What the actual fuck is going on in the US currently?

I think the eagles in the US are fighting with the hawks. Poor FBI never had an eagle in its emblem and got swallowed up by Homeland.

Quoting Shawn

They kinda just ribbit, and hide from eagles and hawks. Hehe.

Maybe there's more divisions, yes, but it's the predator/prey relationship that dominates, as in nature. There's symbiotes too.

Anyway, I just wanted to share an idea why there is a rational reason to hope for social improvement, at least based on the Dawkins model. And Im glad to share it with you, espeically, for listening to my horror stories. Its more than most can do. Hope you have a nice day )

Quoting ernestm

Hope you have a nice day.

Thank you Sir, and likewise.

Quoting Shawn

Wow, Hanny, that's very nice of you. What the actual fuck is going on in the US currently?

Where I live, it's the same. Any pocket of affluence requires very little government oversight. Such is Sweden. If you have one homogenous class, no warfare.

Quoting Hanover

Where I live, it's the same. Any pocket of affluence requires very little government oversight. Such is Sweden. If you have one homogenous class, no warfare.

I'm concerned about what's happening in US politics, aren't you?

Quoting Shawn

I'm concerned about what's happening in US politics, aren't you?

Only if it means Trump might not get reelected.

Quoting Hanover

Only if it means Trump might not get reelected.

He's throwing a party every damm day in the White House. I heard they're out of presents, and he's asking Homeland for the keys the the House. What's going on? Derp.

The NSA won't comply, and he's telling them fuck off.

They have all the keys BTW:

Quoting Shawn

A horse doesn't care...

This is about the only question that psychology has given a clear and unambiguous answer to. If you want an obedient docile horse, or dog, or child, rewarding good behaviour outperforms punishing bad behaviour by a huge margin.

But more so with highly social apes and especially humans, learning takes place by imitation. So violent punishing parents bring up their kids to be violent punishers. Monkey see, monkey do.

The idea that society will collapse without punishment comes from those punished punishers who cannot conceive that anyone would cooperate without a background of fear and threat. And it is still a dominant attitude unfortunately. One has to prevent violent people from hurting others and so perhaps they must be forcibly restrained behind bars, and in the same way one has to forcibly restrain a child that does not know better from running into the road. But punishment is a waste of time in every case. One cannot teach or enforce cooperation by means of coercion.

Quoting unenlightened

One cannot teach or enforce cooperation by means of coercion.

Oh my fucking God. I have seen things and this is one of them.