If free will truly doesnt exist, and were essentially following a pre-destined life line then I think that a reform system is the only way to go, over any other system it would create a way to facilitate personal growth of the individuals.

If I'm understanding the argument correctly, the reasoning behind rehabilitation is that it is simply more ethical than placing them in a cell for the remainder of their sentence.

Personally, I don't really care for anyone's "personal growth".

Even if we do believe that nobody has true free will this isn't exactly contradictory, as one could commit crime prior to the education and skill development they face during incarceration. One of the biggest causes of crime is under education and poor upbringing. If can nullify one of those factors from an individual it could play a large role in them truly reforming.

Yeah. I never like that kind of answer. It just screams progressive, PC bullshit to me.

If someone commits a top-tier crime (murder, for example), I'm inclined to believe it wasn't because they didn't learn the pythagorean theorem in school, y'know? Perhaps upbringing is a bit more important in this instance but then again, I don't think people should be raising kids anyways.

The posts in this thread is so cringey.

How?

The reason I think this is because I personally believe whether or not free will does exist the under educated, and the poorly raised are the ones most likely to commit crimes, but I also believe by teaching those same individuals new skills and educating them on the things they missed out on through childhood you can release them to the public reformed

It doesn't take a great deal of education to understand not to shoot someone. I reject the idea that these people "missed out" on basic compassion and common decency. That's something most of us have intrinsically.

Additionally, I'm not sure teaching criminals a trade whilst imprisoned is going to change them a great deal to the point that they can be released back into society.

Quote from: MerciBuckets on October 23, 2015, 11:43:24 PM

The reason I think this is because I personally believe whether or not free will does exist the under educated, and the poorly raised are the ones most likely to commit crimes, but I also believe by teaching those same individuals new skills and educating them on the things they missed out on through childhood you can release them to the public reformed

It doesn't take a great deal of education to understand not to shoot someone. I reject the idea that these people "missed out" on basic compassion and common decency. That's something most of us have intrinsically.

Additionally, I'm not sure teaching criminals a trade whilst imprisoned is going to change them a great deal to the point that they can be released back into society.

Obviously the context of the crime would be very important but im thinking smaller crimes like, small theft, B&A, assault and battery. Etc.

Obviously if you rape someone i think you should be castrated then force fed your genitals. But smaller crimes should focus on reform

I will need to dwell on this a bit more.

Philosophy is scary.

I like you.

It may not be "their fault" in the sense of a free agent making a bad decision, but a human as a system is capable of rationality and judgement without having free will. Law is based on that fact and has no need for free will as a concept. Law is natural just as human behavior is.

Sure, a human is capable of rationality, but not the same rationality that everyone else possesses.

For example, a man with a starving family could rationally decide that the end justifies the means for stealing a loaf of bread.

Or, in a more extreme sense, that someone deserves to die.

Clearly these people don't operate on the same level of rationality that we do, but again, that isn't their fault. They may have mental deficiencies or genetic predispositions. 

Quote from: Tsirist on October 24, 2015, 12:11:45 AM

It may not be "their fault" in the sense of a free agent making a bad decision, but a human as a system is capable of rationality and judgement without having free will. Law is based on that fact and has no need for free will as a concept. Law is natural just as human behavior is.

Sure, a human is capable of rationality, but not the same rationality that everyone else possesses.

For example, a man with a starving family could rationally decide that the end justifies the means for stealing a loaf of bread.

Or, in a more extreme sense, that someone deserves to die.

Clearly these people don't operate on the same level of rationality that we do, but again, that isn't their fault. They may have mental deficiencies or genetic predispositions.

I don't disagree with that assessment at all, though I might word it more carefully so as not to make thieves sound inhuman. Nevertheless, where does any sort of free will come into play there?

Well, that's exactly my point -- free will doesn't come into play. These people cannot choose to not think this way, so how much of it is really their fault?

That answer isn't really up to me, I think. You can choose for yourself how to handle that knowledge. Personally I like to treat everything I myself do as though it were done with my own free will, for the purposes of holding myself accountable. But at the end of the day, I try to use this very understanding that you've brought up to encourage myself to try and understand that others exist the way they do because of the course the world set them on to begin with.

Is it their fault? Yes, and no. I like to lean towards no because empathy I guess. But in the context of their system . . . they do as they are designed to, and in that sense it is entirely their fault.

If they're predetermined to commit crimes, then everybody else is predetermined to stop them.

But that's just a clever phrase I've heard used against the idea that criminals "Can't help it" because of determinism. As confusing of an idea as determinism can be, I really don't see how people come up with conundrums like this. Yeah, fundamentally, we might all just be predictable sacks of chemical reactions, but it doesn't seem like it. It feels like we're in control of our actions, so we might as well act accordingly.

So...destiny?


Oh my god we can become Legend?!

Determinism is some stupid shit tbh

call it free will or not

My point being that it is not.

we are what we are.

That's not giving an important philosophical question the total respect it deserves.

I support rehabilitation for precisely the reason that free will does not actually exist.

Too bad you're wrong

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on October 23, 2015, 10:56:08 PM

Our minds are stochastic -- effectively random -- and so our will, while entirely deterministic, is effectively free and undetermined.

Something either stochastic or determined--or both--is not anything which can be called a "will".

I'm interested, how would you go about defining "will" and whether or not it is free?