There's a difference between believing that an execution is morally necessary and demanding to be in the audience for it Not just saying it's okay if racists get punched but making a YouTube channel collecting clips of racists getting punched from across the country
-
-
And I mean I don't think she's saying that's bad, I think she's just saying our norms are in conflict Liberal modern society pretends that we all hate violence and harm and having to punish wrongdoers is a grim necessity we only do out of duty
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
But of course we're lying, humans are weak If we actually didn't want to punish people, we just wouldn't punish them When we do punish people it's because we like it, it makes us feel good, it's baked into the brain's reward centers And I think she's just saying to own that
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I'm all here for not punishing people. People either do bad things because they're bad people or because they're forced into it. If they're bad people then maybe therapy and access to medications could help and, if not, then maybe they need to be kept safely away from others.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @phyphor @arthur_affect and
But none of that is punishment. And why would you punish someone for something outside their control? If they're forced into it then we need to improve whatever systemic issue caused that, and help the person escape that pressure. Again, what does punishment achieve?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's what Contra sort of gets into with this video Our basic psychological drives -- which is what our intellectual moral beliefs are ultimately based on -- are evolved, not designed
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
The "strategy" we're programmed to take with enemies/threats is "rational" in the grand scheme of things, because it evolved out of what helped us survive against said threats But it wasn't set up by some moral authority presuming centralized power
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
Our morality didn't come from a situation where there even was an overarching "we" or "us", some kind of authority who decides what's ultimately best for everyone That's something that evolved out of our society much more recently, and is arguably still mostly only an ideal
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @arthur_affect @phyphor and
When there's no universal "we" and "we" is just me and my small group of friends against a hostile universe, retribution makes *perfect* sense It's the basic way you keep threats at bay, it's game theory You teach people not to mess with you by making them pay if they do
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I think I learned early enough that responses to things were unpredictable that this isn’t extricable from “I want their capabilities removed” instead, partly because if it’s going to react satisfyingly and in no other way, on a reliable basis, why am I enemies with it
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Well, sure, that's why "proportionate response" didn't start as a moral principle but as a purely pragmatic one You hurt them back in whatever way you judge is most likely to deter a recurrence without putting you at greater personal risk
-
-
Yeah see I think I’d given up on being able to predict whether that was going to succeed, let alone whether people were going to interpret benign actions as Also A Punishment Message, by the time I was like twelve
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chrysopoetics @arthur_affect and
Which might be part of why “hurt people, for its own sake” is untethered for me on both ends I want to stop people from doing things and often don’t care if this means harming them but that’s still a different mode of thought
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
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.