22-03-2003 15:13									#61
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Retribution is causing people to face consequences for their actions. Again, you just restated the premise that retribution is moral.

Let's say you kill my SO, and then I kill your SO. That's an act of retribution. Is it therefore moral? Since retribution is moral.

	22-03-2003 15:26									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

"Making people face the consequences of their actions", is somewhat incorrect, or to be more precise, it is not the root reason, it spreads over the other reasons.

a) Them suffering in jail, or being electricuted is NOT a natural consequence of their actions. It is a consequence because the society, trying to ensure the most ethical run of things, persecutes such an action.
b)why does it persecute it? to prevent it from happening. what are the effects that contribute to the prevention of future crime?: deterrance of other potential criminals, the reeducation of the criminal, and the removal of the criminal from society.

	23-03-2003 01:53									#63
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Retribution is causing people to face consequences for their actions. Again, you just restated the premise that retribution is moral.

Seeing that retribution is a moral concept, a definition of it is why it is moral. If I asked you why you thought rehabilitation was moral, a defintion of rehabilitation would suffice.

quote: Let's say you kill my SO, and then I kill your SO. That's an act of retribution. Is it therefore moral?

Yes. It is not legal, but it is moral.

quote: Them suffering in jail, or being electricuted is NOT a natural consequence of their actions.

When did I ever say it had to be a natural consequence?

	23-03-2003 02:07									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Seeing that retribution is a moral concept, a definition of it is why it is moral

and let me guess, this comes back to might makes right? since the case can execute people, it should have that power, correct?

	23-03-2003 02:12									#65
	Full PM-box? Change here!

You mean, since the 'state' can execute people?

Well that and the fact that most people within that state agree that is the best course of action to take.

	23-03-2003 02:15									#66
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Imran

yes i meant the state, sorry for the typo, but so as long as a majority of people believe something that makes it morally right?

would that mean if the majority of southern agreed with lynchings then it'd be moral?

	23-03-2003 02:19									#67
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well yes.

I've constantly said that morality is a democratic thing in democratic states. If a majority of the people believe something is moral, then it becomes societally moral. In non-democratic states, morality is the province of the rulers.

	23-03-2003 02:21									#68
	Full PM-box? Change here!

so then saddam was a very moral leader then i guess

	23-03-2003 03:29									#69
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by korn469 so then saddam was a very moral leader then i guess

well, if the majority of Iraqis think he is moral, than under Imran's standards then he would be.

Imran's reasoning makes sense to me. In democratic states, the majority make the laws. So if the majority think somethn is moral/immoral, then they could make a law that demonstrates as much.

I think this is stupid tho, I think laws should be made independently of morals... my reasoning on how to do so is complicated however.

EDIT: the south could legalize lynchings if the majority wanted it, however the supremecy clause of the Constitution would not allow this, as the majority of the entire US does not see this as moral, and federal laws reflect this.

	23-03-2003 03:32									#70
	Inflate your Upload Space

Answer me this, or start a poll. I don't have time, I'm leaving.

If YOU murder someone, and you know you did and the evidence is there; would you rather be imprisoned for the rest of yor life, or executed by lethal injection ?

Guynemer. Put yourself to good use for a change, and start a poll, ok ?

	23-03-2003 03:34									#71
	Full PM-box? Change here!

imprisoned. All the best works of philosophy have come from jail cells.

	23-03-2003 03:41									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Good to have you back, Sweetheart.

Anytime you'd like to make yourself useful and provide some evidence for your claims, feel free.

	23-03-2003 03:45									#73
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Immortal Wombat imprisoned. All the best works of philosophy have come from jail cells.

mein kompf?

	23-03-2003 04:11									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Kramerman, exactly!

I also agree that laws SHOULD be made amorally (which I know is a moral choice of mine, btw ), because I always thought the protestation of imposing your morality upon me was always valid, and every law is basically imposing morality upon someone else.

quote: so then saddam was a very moral leader then i guess

Depends on who you ask? In the world society he isn't, but in his own corner of the world, he is.

	23-03-2003 05:12									#75
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Imran's reasoning makes sense to me. In democratic states, the majority make the laws. So if the majority think somethn is moral/immoral, then they could make a law that demonstrates as much

Kramerman

I disagree, that is little more than mob rule. I think that laws shouldn't be shifting and capricious. At one time the Mullet was in, yet that doesn't mean it was a haircut that actually looked good on people. I personally believe that some actions are just self evidently just or unjust. There are others that are fairly ambivalent. Yet I believe that all people are entitled to a large amount of rights that don't inflict harm on others. I don't think a majority should ever have the justification to take away these rights.

quote: I think this is stupid tho, I think laws should be made independently of morals... my reasoning on how to do so is complicated however.

I shouldn't have used moral, I should have used just, because I too think that laws shouldn't rely on traditional morals, but more utilitarian justification, that take into account people's individual rights. Please explain how you think they should make laws.

quote: I also agree that laws SHOULD be made amorally (which I know is a moral choice of mine, btw ), because I always thought the protestation of imposing your morality upon me was always valid, and every law is basically imposing morality upon someone else.

Imran,

I agree that laws are basically imposing a certain group of morals on people, but I only agree with this to a point. I think that laws should ensure a reasonable degree of safety for all people, but I think that morality can certainly be used as a justification to take away individual rights, which to me is a bad thing.

As far as the death penalty goes, I don't support it in the vast majority of cases, but there are certain criminals I think it is appropriate for, serial killers being the ones that comes to mind.

	23-03-2003 13:57									#76
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Seeing that retribution is a moral concept, a definition of it is why it is moral. If I asked you why you thought rehabilitation was moral, a defintion of rehabilitation would suffice.

I consider rehabilitation, under certain circumstances, to be moral because it would decrease net coercion.

Let's put it in another way; why do you think the government is justified in carrying out acts of retribution?

quote: Yes. It is not legal, but it is moral.

You can't possibly be serious.

Ok, what if we glaze the Middle East due to 9/11. That's an act of retribution as well. So is it then moral?

	23-03-2003 14:03									#77
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Let's put it in another way; why do you think the government is justified in carrying out acts of retribution?

Because it is better for the controlling authority to deal with retribution because otherwise you'd have chaos in people offing each other.

quote: You can't possibly be serious.

I 100% am.

quote: Ok, what if we glaze the Middle East due to 9/11. That's an act of retribution as well. So is it then moral?

when did I say that for any bad act, any act of retribution is ok? I never advocated shooting someone for stealing a piece of gum.

Taking to another reason for punishment: Ok, what if we decided to cut people's hands off for theft. That's an act of deterrance as well. So is it moral?

	23-03-2003 14:51									#78
	Tired of ads?

quote: Because it is better for the controlling authority to deal with retribution because otherwise you'd have chaos in people offing each other.

What do you think deterrence is?

quote: when did I say that for any bad act, any act of retribution is ok? I never advocated shooting someone for stealing a piece of gum.

You never qualified your belief in the morality of retribution. If you take the presupposition that retribution is moral, then any act of retribution is moral.

quote: Taking to another reason for punishment: Ok, what if we decided to cut people's hands off for theft. That's an act of deterrance as well. So is it moral?

I never asserted that deterrence is necessarily moral. Deterrence can be moral if it reduces net coercion, and that only occurs with minimal sentences.

	23-03-2003 23:05									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: I never asserted that deterrence is necessarily moral. Deterrence can be moral if it reduces net coercion, and that only occurs with minimal sentences

Ramo, when you say net coercion, you mean the total number of people in the corrections system correct? I completely agree with that, though when you say that only occurs with minimal sentences is that really true? If the maximum penalty for speeding was a dollar fine it doesn't seem that it would deter anyone from speeding, yet if the maximum penalty was on the spot execution I think that would deter speeding. Although, I don't think it would be just, and it would encourage the people who do speed to do anything in their power to escape from the police since they have nothing to lose.

I think that regardless of the punishment associated with the crime, the enforcement side is far more important. If 99% of speeders were pulled over by the police and given the one dollar fine, I think it would have a greater deterence value than if 1% of speeders were pulled over and executed by the police.

	23-03-2003 23:32									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui [ quote: Let's say you kill my SO, and then I kill your SO. That's an act of retribution. Is it therefore moral? Yes. It is not legal, but it is moral.

If you are serious about this, you must be a psychopath. Explain how it is moral to kill an innocent person in response to someone else killing an innocent person? In what society is this considered moral? Certainly not in ours!

Why is it moral to kill a wife for the actions of her husband?

At any rate, I will remind you of this thread, wherein you argued that what is legal is moral and what is illegal is immoral. That contradicts your above statement. Change of heart?

	24-03-2003 01:31									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Boris, that's a difference between societal morality and individual morality. Societal morality is based on laws, individual morality surely isn't.

quote: Explain how it is moral to kill an innocent person in response to someone else killing an innocent person? In what society is this considered moral? Certainly not in ours!

It's been moral for centuries and still is in some cultures. The whole idea that since you killed my children, I will kill your children has been well established.

	24-03-2003 01:31									#82
	Says it all Full PM-box? Change here!

Main Entry: pun·ish·ment
Pronunciation: 'p&-nish-m&nt
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : the act of punishing
2 a : suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution b : a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure
3 : severe, rough, or disastrous treatment




Let the punishment fit the crime.

	24-03-2003 01:36									#83
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Thanks Slow... perhaps this will show Ramo that EVERY punishment is retribution of some kind.

	24-03-2003 01:43									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Looked, briefly, for poll about whether ACS members would choose life in prison or death by execution.
Didn't feel like hunting past 3rd page.

I would be willing to BET, that the majority would say life.

Guess what? You don't get option of picking your punishment (see above).
WHY would the People give PUNISHMENT, preferred by a MURDERER ?

Pulleth out thy collective heads.

	24-03-2003 01:45									#85
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

no they would give the punishment they don't choose.

I think that is a good idea. We should ask prisoners what punishment they want, and give them the opposite

Although the prisoners could catch on and say the opposite of what they want.

	24-03-2003 01:50									#86
	Support Apolyton

Imran you kinda spook me.

	24-03-2003 01:53									#87
	Support Apolyton

I spook myself .

I simply see the world as it is: a crappy, mean place . Sure, there are some good, nice things. But most people and governments are just *******s.

	24-03-2003 01:56									#88
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Don't have to ask, Diss.
This is America. The majority wins.
Voters, and murderers.

	24-03-2003 02:10									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Imran: that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for something better, or else what's the point?

	24-03-2003 02:19									#90
	Remove this text

quote: Ramo, when you say net coercion, you mean the total number of people in the corrections system correct? I completely agree with that, though when you say that only occurs with minimal sentences is that really true?

By net coercion, I mean the total amount of force in society and prisons. Including force used by prison authorities as well as force used by free people.

quote: I think that regardless of the punishment associated with the crime, the enforcement side is far more important.

Agreed.

quote: Boris, that's a difference between societal morality and individual morality. Societal morality is based on laws, individual morality surely isn't.

I'm not referring to social morality. Societal morality is totally irrelevent to the issue. I'm asking you why you think retribution is moral. Not if most people think retribution is moral.

quote: Let the punishment fit the crime.

Why?

quote: Thanks Slow... perhaps this will show Ramo that EVERY punishment is retribution of some kind.

I don't believe the purpose of prison is punishment/retribution. It should exist to protect society. Societ is not protected if you go about offing people because you feel a hankering for vengeance.

quote: Guess what? You don't get option of picking your punishment (see above). WHY would the People give PUNISHMENT, preferred by a MURDERER ?

Because I'm not a sadistic psycho who would kill people to "punish" them. People like that are reason prisons should exist in the first place.