One of the universal killers of growup discussions about mercy-deterrence balances: just admitting the existence of a trade-off sounds like saying "It's complicated," which sounds like an argument for mercy, which sounds like taking the side of Bad.
-
-
This is a mechanism for Moral Clarity Bias / "automatic norms" a la
@robinhanson, that doesn't go through norms being more shared in the ancestral environment. Anyone who advocates a norm may claim that norm's manifestation to be obvious and its enforcement an unmixed blessing.Show this thread -
I mean, I probably do tend to come down on the side of mercy relatively more often, because I share the Jewish conviction that every human is an idiot, and that therefore it's not fair to punish someone unless there was a written law making the details excruciatingly clear.
Show this thread -
On Jewish theology this is because you can't possibly figure stuff out without divine guidance transmitted through generations of rabbis, and on my worldview it's because the brain is crap software.
Show this thread -
But let's be frank: part of being Jewish is a deep, genuine sympathy for other people's mistakes, a sense that it's not fair or reasonable to expect them to be as wise, as smart, as perfect as God or you. That's why Jewish law is so (a) merciful and (b) excruciatingly detailed.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.