PRISON HEALTHCARE
Free prostate exams daily.
(OJ Simpson)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: dunno
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous I has a sad | Speak no evil Next »
PRISON HEALTHCARE
» 196 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
Bob the eternally un… on Undercover Loss Gutt on 90s Jokes Wyt on 90s Jokes Doveswing on Seems Legit Whatever on And Then There Was One Byt on Aww, Nicknames! Whatever on Undercover Loss Whatever on Undercover Loss Geary on Undercover Loss Whatever on Undercover Loss 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Every Minute of Every Day
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
Itz way past
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
Goggie GIF: Snack time? Or nap time?
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
Ever Thought About Going into Medicine?
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Take That, Schrodinger
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
And Here We Have the Wild Barfing Rainbow Monkeys of Borneo
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Pile of Otters
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
Paul Revere Approves
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Happy Cat is in Pizza Heaven
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
Gives New Meaning to 'Going Commando'
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
Nicolas Cage is Watching You Read
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Gai-sensei Totally Looks Like Jim Croce
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
Rape is hilarious. Oh wait, no it isn’t.
But… Soap jokes are the only jokes the little homophobes know how to make!!
It also comes from the punishment fetishists. They confuse revenge with justice.
yes, a statement about prostate exams in prison is meant to be a dig against homosexuals because we’re homophobic…
.
have you ever noticed that by being “politically correct” people sometimes insinuate things worse than their original intent, which makes your statement more “politically incorrect” than the original statement made?
.
in other words, by referring to an innocent post as a dig on homosexuals you have actually done more harm than the original caption when your intent was the exact opposite…
Free OJ, he aint do it!!!
Failblog refrence if u dont know
Rape is hilarious if the exaggeration is made correctly… However, it takes a wit like Carlin to make that proper exaggeration.
hearing that oj got raped is hilarious to me… but i do have a bit of a twisted sense of humor that looks for karmic justice…
See my comment above. Punishment fetishism. Hey, let’s bring back the stocks, maybe the anal pear and the iron maiden too. Drawing and quartering with maybe a little tar and feathering, yeah, oooh, now I feel all tingly and happy inside, JUSTICE! yeah, ooooh, REVENGE, man that feels good.
Ya know, you never seem to pull off sarcasm without sounding like what one would expect from a stereotypical teenager. It is rather annoying, actually.
Feel free to fill this thread with your commentary about justice vs vengeance. I always enjoy it.
Uncle Fester?
No, I am only 27 and I live in IA. Fester is British.
Oh. Sorry, the cynical vituperation reminded me of Fester.
@DWN- this is not meant to be harsh, just honest
I don’t know, vengeance is something that some otherwise smart people really fall for hard. There IS a difference between vengeance and justice. Both are way too complicated to pull off correctly, but all the same I think the apathy towards vengeance and what goes on in prison can be disturbing
In all honest, I find that justice is just government sanctioned vengeance. Sure a few well meaning souls make a fuss for some kind of betterment but the cruel and unusual clause for punishments was more for the witnesses than the accused. After all, only a small number of jaded souls would appreciate watching a person burst into screaming fire from electricity.
*Honesty
Stupid typing fails.
I think there’s a difference between wanting to see criminals officially tortured by the state, as you seem to be referring to, and finding it somewhat grimly satisfying and/or amusing when they do it to each other, especially in the case of those who have victimized the smaller and weaker finding themselves in the position of being the smaller and weaker person victimized.
Also….not being into torture myself, I hadn’t heard of the pear until it was on an episode on Bones recently as a murder weapon. Interesting that I’m now hearing it twice in, what, less than two weeks?
those shows are so interesting. I like to see how human beings as a group work and create toward a given goal. I also have low expectations for human beings
It was right after a program on the way people were killed in Ancient times, like the wickerman, crucification, etc. I was watching both programs while I was grading papers and finally had to turn them off when I realized I was grading unusually harsh.
Antiques roadshow makes for more a benign grading mood!
I don’t know, I love the Roadshow, but I’m always ticked I don’t find cool, extremely valuable stuff at a garage sale for two bucks.
I always find uncool, extremely unvaluable stuff at garage sales for fifteen bucks, buy it, and have a Lewis Black SONOVAB!TCH moment when I get it home and see the ‘Made In China’ label stuck to the bottom.
I always figured that I’ll be lucky to be one of the people in the booth at the very end of the show saying ‘I found out my prized vase was worth $19.95, but I had fun!’
But Roadshow is great for ‘average people’ history–genuine butterchurns, that women spent hours churning butter with…!
My absolute favorite is when someone gets on and starts talking like they’re the expert and they’re all, “I know this is a genuine blah blah and I paid all this money for it and blah blah blah, I’m so smarmy” and the appraiser is like, “yeah, it’s fake and worth about two bucks.” I don’t care if you did think it was worth a lot of money, I’d act like I didn’t know anything about it so I didn’t look like an idiot later.
“Hubris”, it’s not just a word!
You can always tell, too. When they start running about the mouth I’m like, yes, this is gonna get good!
I don’t mind it, but some of the stuff that gets a high dollar value belongs in a garage sale. But I do like the looks on people’s faces when they thing they have a piece of crap only to find out it’s worth like $15,000!
As my mom always says when something ugly is worth a lot of money, “sell it!”
Hell, if something’s PRETTY and worth a lot of money, sell it!! lol
I’m still floored by that guy with the $1/2 million wool blanket! PBS did have enough smarts to make a great ad out of that one. But I always wondered what the owner did with his “blankie”!
He turned it into a Snuggie, the Blanket with Sleeves!
A couple weeks ago they had the descendant of Frances Hodgson Burnett and she had all this great stuff and copies of Little Lord Faunteroy and A Secret Garden. It was one of the coolest things I’ve seen, but then A Little Princess was my favorite book when I was a kid.
Wow–secret garden!! I’ll have to watch for the re-run!
Justice is punishment, in the case of criminals.
From wiktionary:
3. Judgment and punishment of a party who has allegedly wronged (an)other(s).
to demand justice
And if we are to believe our cinema, Justice is balance. A murder is murdered. A thief has their freedom taken. A rapist is raped. A person who tortures and kills is in turn, tortured and killed. That is technically balance.
Putting a person in a cage that others have to pay for isn’t balance. It can be a powerful deterrent but I wouldn’t call it anything close to balance. However, that is dickering about with semantics and encouraging the holier than though or I should say the “More Enlightened than Thoughs” to chime in about barbarism and the like.
Justice, and the need to be made whole after being wronged, is a powerful force in our society. It’s easy to look at another person and say “you should rise above that”, but it takes a very strong will to apply that view to oneself when the situation arises. Further, I have to ask, when the hell did we “outgrow” justice? I believe the answer is “never”, and it’s pointless and counterproductive to try.
Really though, I think it’s right that criminals should suffer for their crimes, since they care nothing for the suffering that they inflict on their victims. By the same token, I’m opposed to levying punishment for truly victimless crimes.
Precisely my thinking too. Bob the pothead is only hurting himself. As long as he continues to Only hurt himself, leave Bob the Pothead alone. He has no place among Tim the Rapist, Jeff the Cannibal, and Todd Lightfingers the Thief.
Bob the pothead is most certainly committing a crime.. against nature! Killing all those poor little pot leaves..
What if Bob the Pothead takes cuttings from a mother plant and only harvests the clones for his smoking pleasure?
Is killing clones wrong?
I don’t know about pot growing techniques, but am curious if it could have the effect of pruning, if bob the pothead cares for the plant and does not over harvest the leaves. If it is like pruning then isn’t bob the pothead helping the plant?
Well since the leaves are useless, Bob the Pothead will probably just harvest the flowers.
Of course it’s wrong!! Just like walking on the grass!
But there is a higher question. Does Bob the Pothead garden organically? Or is he using harsh pesticides and excessive fertilizer?
Higher question. I see what you did there.
How does creating more suffering restore balance or help the victim? I was mugged in Seattle and lost my left eye. I have not only forgiven them, feel empathy for the people that did it to me. Yes it was hard to do. I don’t want them punished, but I do want to ensure they can’t hurt others. Justice means the wrong is righted, it does not mean the guilty are punished. Prevention means ensuring that someone can’t hurt others again. Rehabilitation means improving a perpetrator so they do not feel the need to do wrong again.
–
Would you seek to punish a hurricane that killed your family? Why or why not?
seth, i see what you’re reaching for… but good luck trying to get people to join your side of the argument in real life…
People? Good luck trying to get ME on my side in real life. I may talk the talk, but you’ve been here long enough to know what a jerk I can be. The facts are, most people never rise above a very basic level of moral reasoning. But for whatever reason, the regulars at PK don’t strike me as ‘most people.’ In any case, when I write like this, I’m doing it for me. I base my life off of these ideas, and I debate them in public in order to help figure out how good they are. And to reaffirm to myself that yes, this is what I believe and this is how I’d prefer to live.
A hurricane is just wind. It isn’t malevolent, it doesn’t have a motivation. People aren’t hurricanes. People have responsibility for their own actions. It is apples and oranges. You can blame a rock for falling because it is a rock and has no thoughts. You can blame the jerk who pushed the rock.
Putting a guy behind bars doesn’t right anything. You don’t get your eye back. Dead people aren’t raised from the dead by a friendly cleric of the state. It is punishment. Even putting him behind bars doesn’t really stop him. There are other prisoners and if he isn’t in a room for the rest of his life, he will eventually get out.
Rehabilitation is dependent on the person so I don’t know what to tell ya. *shrugs* Not something I would count on as much as you.
*can’t blame a rock
*headdesk*
How do you KNOW that a hurricane doesn’t have motivations? How do you know that a person does? Because you believe the person to be similar to you, and you believe yourself to have motivations? A hurricane’s motivations are no different than yours, really. It does what is in its nature to do.
–
The problem with ascribing actions to motivation or character is that it ignores circumstance, and therefore can only approximate the true cause of actions. If the circumstances were different, the crime would not occur. If the circumstances were different, the hurricane would not form.
–
We never know even our own motivations in full. That’s not how the narrative evolves. We make up a story to explain our actions after the fact. Motivations themselves have causes, and those causes have causes. Why do we draw the line at the person’s motivations and refuse to look further? We don’t do that for a hurricane, “Oh, it’s just bade and wants to hurt people.” No, we look further, to the causes that allow a hurricane to exists, like pressure, temperature, winds and humidity. Why do we not perform the same level of analysis on humans? Why do we stop thinking as soon as we decide, “They’re bad?”
Because the hurricane has no choice. It isn’t even alive nor will I let you drag me into the existential argument for the existence of what defines life. It is a useless argument. We are talking about people, who can make decisions not hurricanes which cannot.
We look for causes of a hurricane to try and predict that which is highly dangerous to us. We do the same for people. Trying to figure out why the poison berry is poisonous isn’t as important as the fact that the poison berry is poisonous. I don’t look for the motivation behind the plant. I find it very safe to assume that it evolved to a state where it doesn’t want its damn berries eaten and I bugger off and leave it alone.
You are trying to add a level of hippie dippie depth to an issue that isn’t that deep. Perhaps Jeff the Cannibal always liked to lick his wounds because he simply liked the taste of blood. Perhaps he had a relationship with somebody who liked bloodletting and he indulged for a time peacefully. Then perhaps as things evolved his mind had something snap where he wanted more, so he took more, resulting in murder and cannibalism. /bad example
Justification is the story you tell yourself afterward if something doesn’t necessarily feel right or sound good when you retell the account. Motivation is very present and can be complicated but it can also be simple.
You are over simplifying the assumption about a person being bad. The thinking doesn’t necessarily stop there. You are also assuming that more is warranted. If somebody attacks my four year old son, I don’t need their life story to put it into perspective. I don’t need to know the backstory of those that wronged me. If I have done nothing to them, nothing justifies it or I simply don’t care.
You are belaboring under the assumption that people are entitled to something more than reaping what they sow. If I hurt somebody, I can expect to be hurt back. Granted, I might have any reaction from arrogance to being stupidly mystified as to why etc etc blah blah. Fact of the matter is that reality doesn’t care for my justification. They chose their actions just as I choose my own. A situation might put a ton of pressure towards a particular choice but a person still has a choice.
A hurricane is just a hurricane. It does what it does but that doesn’t mean we won’t try to stop it or avoid it. Same for a person. They will do what they will do, doesn’t mean there isn’t repercussions.
The hurricane has exactly as much choice, in reality, as a person does. Given the exact same genetics and other circumstances, the person will make the exact same choice every single time. There is no wiggle room. There is no seperation of the person from the universe. There isn’t even really a person, just an aritrart person shaped boundary. It is like the face and vases illusion. Look at it one way and you see the universe. Look at it another way, and you see the person. But it’s the same thing.
Arbitrary, not air tart or whatever my fingers mistyped up there…
So much pretty much I am wasting my time speaking to a volume of space shaped like a person. Um no. You are part of the universe but you aren’t an illusion. However, I can see where this is going and I lack the drug intake to follow along.
Sorry, I’m a person, you’re a person. You are upon and in the universe. You are part of the universe. The universe isn’t you. It just doesn’t jive. I am in the universe and sitting at this desk at work. The illusion is believing that you don’t exist. You exist, in all your rotting meat bag goodness, just like the rest of us.
And better yet, you have your mind and it was made up. Ergo, we are at loggerheads since there is not a way for me to be drugged enough to believe you and you surely will just think me banal or just disregard me as another illusion.
I’ve been quietly trying to follow along…Seth, is your theory something like that the universe is similar to an infinitely sized biological entity of some kind that we’re all a part of and that therefore although we have the illusion of choice we are all like sand in a current? That’s…pretty much what I’m getting. Which is interesting (and of course can’t be proved or disproved) but I’ll have to admit being somewhat dubious about the concept.
Oh, and if that’s not it? Sorry. I’m notoriously bad at anything philosophical.
Maybe we are just products of factors we don’t know, fated to make a certain choice. Still, the choice has to be made and if we are fated to take the consequences, so be it.
@ Seth. I think you’re right about empathy. Looking at someone and saying “how terrible and inhuman they are!” seems to me to be a way of allowing ourselves to think “how much better I am!”
The problem is that we are semantic level jumping, talking at different semantic levels. I am at work right now and stone cold sober, by the way, so don’t try that one on me. On one level, of course I am a person and you are a person. On another level, person is just a word, one that we all interpret slightly differently. On another level, when we look closely at the boundary between self and non self, we see that it is arbitrary. Most of the cells (by number, not weight)in your body aren’t you, they are bacterium. Your entire body recycles about every seven years, meaning, you do not contain even one molecule that you did seven years ago. The contents of your mind are similarly changing. So what exactly is this ‘you’ you speak of? Whatever answer you give, I can give a counter example where your answer doesn’t apply.
–
I am not ‘part of’ the universe because boundaries only exist in the human mind. There is no definite boundary between inside and outside. In fact, inside and outside are human constructs, only real in the human mind.On the other hand, I am not the universe, and the universe is not me. That too is dualistic thinking.
–
I’m not claiming I don’t exist. That is just as dualistic as claiming I do. You are confusing the map (words and ideas) with the territory (reality.) For instance, I am a ladder. And a chair. And a fire. Can you tell me why those things are just as true as saying I am a person?
The more you talk, the less substance I am seeing in your words.
I am myself because I never stop being myself, even when I pretend otherwise. The molecules that make me up are just building blocks. A means to see the same being even with different bricks holding up the walls. Who I am is the content of my mind, the body being just a package, a label though a part of my identity. Nothing you say will ever counter that for me. Counter it for yourself for that is all you will do. I know my mind and can see my past in the proverbial pages written in my mind.
So you are not a ladder for a ladder is a set of shapes put into function whose base material is only relevant to the sturdiness needed to reach the goal.
You are not a chair, least not at the moment, I don’t know how many strip clubs you visit or what you do in your spare time.
You are not a fire for you are a semisolid form with energy within it, not a form of energy that gives heat and consumes flammable materials.
I am not confusing the words with the reality. Reality merely has labels given by my predecessors so that I can properly references parts of reality. I say rock when I see a rock, if I know more about the rock I can reference something more specific. However, rock is a word to reference rocks. As a human I understand the function of language. It is to give name to the universe not to take the place of the universe.
All you are doing now is stating your arrogance and believed superiority. Saying I am wrong because you say so is getting old and that is all this is boiling down to. You are broadening the picture til there is no picture to say that is the truth. The truth is that there is very much a picture, if you want to discuss something useless, then I am going to be done. Luckily work last for but another 30 minutes thus making it easier for me to just wander away instead of my nature giving me pressure to override my original choice. Having free will doesn’t mean I necessarily use it and I am a compulsive twit.
I am a ladder and so are you. What, you never put your hands together to help another guy up? Wait, maybe that’s a forklift. Never on your hands and knees so someone up? Ah, no, that’s a stepstool. Okay, you are right. I’m not a ladder.
–
I am a chair because people have sat on me. But also because I am sitting in a chair. Now, something exists outside of me, I’m pretty sure of that. But the sensations, everything we can know about said outside world, me, the interface and solidity of it, pressure, looking down and seeing the color and shape, everything we can ever possibly know about chairness is entirely inside me. What exists outside me has no fixed name.
–
I am a fire because I burn. I take in oxygen and breath out carbon dioxide. My cells burn fuel. See how easy this is?
A hurricane isn’t a creature; it’s not even a thing. It’s an event. It isn’t a wild animal following its nature nor a thinking person driven by circumstancees; it isn’t just caused by colliding pressure systems, it IS the collision. Likewise, the avalanche is not gravity, nor is it the rock; it’s a bunch of falling rocks.
We don’t punish hurricanes because we *can’t*; they’re just wind. They can’t be reasoned with, intimidated, or rehabilitated.
People, on the other hand, have choices. They can choose how to react to their circumstances, even if their options are not the best. You could argue that those choices are inescapably tied to circumstance as well, but at that level of reasoning we also have no choice but to stand in righteous judgment. That, too is the result of the circumstances that brought us to this point.
That being said, I do advocate some level of sympathy for wrongdoers. I believe in the possibility of the rehabilitation of criminals, and that requires more than simple punishment. But people still have to be responsible for their actions.
I don’t know how many times I can say that I agree that people should be held accountable for their actions. One does not need to invoke the ideas of free will or choice in order to hold a person accountable. I have also explained why they should be held accountable, and it has nothing to do with free will or choices. It is pragmatic. When a hurricane comes, we get in a shelter. When a person does wrong, we attempt to make them right the wrong, we give consequences (because most people never rise beyond the ‘what are the likely consequences’ level of moral reasoning), and we remove them from society for a period of time, hopefully until they can make better decisions in the future. None of this requires we lose empathy for the person we are punishing. We don’t have to harden our hearts and hate them in order to punish them.
Nor do we have to think they are space fairy dust based illusions to have empathy. We can accept that people make choices and grant consequences accordingly.
You are the one walking into the issue of making the hurricane synonymous with the person in terms of punishment and reparations and still act baffled when we come back at you.
Your actions have consequences. Your actions are part of a choice. In this case, word choice. Hell, I have said asinine things only to have them thrown back in my face. If you notice in my posts, I have even mentioned flaws in my own thinking.
In the thinking you are presenting, I could not use an edit button for my posts because that post will always look like that no matter what because I cannot change how that action appears. However, if given the option for an edit button, I use it and correct myself and my posts.
People have had change of heart in the middle of their actions and stop. According to you, they have no choice but they make a choice.
I don’t quite see how you expect to win this particular argument because it is degenerating into calling us all space illusions or unenlightened because we grasp at the idea of justice and punishment.
Nobody said anything about space fairy dust. Illusions can and do make choices and grant consequences all the time. Yes, my actions have consequences. “Cause and effect” is a useful concept. Do you understand what it is about this discussion that makes you fearful and defensive? >:) I hope you realize that ‘enlightenment’ is just a word. I also want you to understand that I grasp at the idea of justice and punishment, too. Consequences: effective. Making moral judgments and losing empathy: ineffective. Get it?
Defensive because I am getting rather insulted. Fearful, not so much. And the more you pile on the attitude, the more I get annoyed.
As for the space fairy dust, that is pretty much how your debate is starting to sound so I used the term. You are saying we are all illusions which pretty much means we don’t exist. Something I find annoying as when I headdesk, I feel it. Whether I like it or not, I am here. I am sitting in this chair, rotting as we are all rotting. No, that isn’t an illusion.
The idea that I am a DWN shaped void in reality just makes me want to remove other voids from existence before removing myself. I don’t see believing we are all arbitrary illusions as intellectually honest or constructive.
Seems to have the same weight as the idea that a benevolent creator exists who is infinite but can only forgive the sins of a finite being by killing something dear to it… Horribly. Oh and it will torture you forever for something you not even have the chance to know. No, it doesn’t follow logic.
If you are using the space fairy dust argument to tell me to feel more empathy for rapists and murderers, you picked the wrong argument as it only makes me doubt you. You could have picked way better means to bridge that gap. Next time, try something solid. It makes better bridges.
*shrugs*
I disagree in general, but I think here we just have a difference of opinion that isn’t really reducible to something we can argue, so I’ll just ask your opinion on the case of a convicted innocent. Plenty of innocent people have been executed (less so recently). I don’t want to debate death penalty, but what if the guy who is convicted of rape wasn’t a rapist? I don’t doubt there are cases like this, do these exceptions make it a bad thing on general principle?
Actually, I would support the stocks, and public caning as punishments, and do away with most of the prisons. We simply cannot afford to incarcerate the number of people we do, and I think a little corporal punishment would do wonders for repeat drunk driving offendors.
I also would be in favor of life in prison for quite a few sexual offendors.
People can say what they will but a spanking when I was a lad kept me out of trouble. Life spanks harder than the hand of any loving parent. Prison, death, all sorts of avoidable issues that could be curbed with a bit of restraint from the participants.
Much better than I got my ass bruised a couple times than I didn’t learn to keep out of trouble.
I had a similar experience growing up. Funny how one of us ended up a fetishist, and one didn’t. I guess that’s not the only factor in breeding new fetishists, eh?
wow. i just gleaned way to much information about both of you…
anybody got any brain bleach laying around?
I’m sorry. There are just certain things you cannot “unknow.”
I’ve got some brain Downy, how about that? Or Brain Spray ‘n Wash?
Being a google/wiki-educated failed “artist” and overall tool helps.
Hey, look DWN! Your personal stalker is back! You know, I think she just needs to get laid more often. Hey crazy stalker lady, are you bi? Into three ways? Ever travel near Albuquerque? Call me.
LOL, suck my ass, loser!
I get the impression you’d like that a lot.
I get the impression that you’re a stupid twat.
Yup!
Present it.
Hey look, Captain Obsequious, if some dumb-azz chooses to post his/her personal information on a public website, nobody can whine about “stalking” when people look at it.
It’s a sad statement in these tough economic times that the mentally ill cannot afford to stay on their medication.
Obsequious? I do not think it means what you think it means. And we know ALL about you and your stalking, crazy stalker lady.
I am curious where I have been posting all this personal info. I have made minor mention from time to time but nothing big or anything you could just go to in one click. So I do wonder how long this “stranger” has been reading.
Then again, it does bring up the conundrum. Who is the bigger loser? The loser or the loser stalking the loser?
@ Seth – Try looking at the big picture instead of being so simplistic, azzwipe, and you’ll understand why I chose that word. Keep running to defend the groupthink, though. It’s always amusing to watch the hive mind in action.
As I said before, you give up the right to whine about “stalking” when you post your personal shat on a public forum.
@ Jane – Here’s $4.00. Try WalMart.
@crazy stalker lady – Accusations of ‘groupthink’ are a good example of what’s known as a ‘thought terminating cliche.’ Just toss out the word groupthink and you don’t even need to argue your point, it’s an automatic win! Obviously, your opponent can’t think for themselves and their points are null and void because of this mysterious and undefined ‘groupthink.’ Here’s a clue for you: I think you are crazy because I’ve seen you act crazy. And another clue: because you are crazy, your brain doesn’t work right and you will lose every argument you get in with me. Badly. Please keep it up though, I enjoy shooting fish in a barrel.
$4.00 is what Walmart charges for antibiotics, you lackwit.
I really didn’t think that I’d have to connect the dots for you. The concept of groupthink is hardly “mysterious” or “undefined”. But, if you’d like me to discuss it, I’ll be happy to. A good example of groupthink is when a group responds to someone who has a different opinion with “thought terminating cliches” such as calling the dissident “crazy”, “mentally ill”, and “stalker”. Other widely used techniques in groupthink are “dysphemism” and, what appears to be your personal favorite, “argumentum verbosium”.
But, I really have more interesting things to do today. The sun is shining, it’s 75 degrees outside and the surf is up, so you’ll have to forgive me as I most likely won’t check back for a week or so. Maybe by that time you’ll think of something more cogent than “you’re crazy”. Doubtful, but you can always hope for it.
“Being a google/wiki-educated failed “artist” and overall tool helps.”
That is the first thing you wrote in this thread. That’s not “a different opinion” that’s a personal attack. It also makes you look like a crazy stalker, not to mention implies that you have the emotional development of a 12 year old girl who didn’t get invited to the sleepover.
Amazing, CSL! It’s almost as though you are using logic. Too bad you don’t know how to apply it to yourself and your own behavior. But I’m sure that the warm fuzzy feelings you get by making up a story that excuses what you do will make up for the fact that you can’t form intimate relationships with other humans.
Fair warning Seth. She doesn’t believe the rules of logic apply to her because of her dissociative issues. I recall a number of rather painful arguments that she flashed the proverbial “I’m dissociative card” thus making her unaccountable for what she says but she’ll be damned if I was not accountable for every single word. It was very frustrating.
Oh and have you taken the moment to check back on that big snafu of discussion had on the taken down plane crash LOL? She was clever enough to use a different email this time but wasn’t so clever in that lol. I think you might get a kick out of how many times she was talking to herself. I counted ten different names to the same email…
@ both Jane and Seth, since you posted exactly the same thing. I’m laughing so hard now about the whole groupthink thing and how quickly you both fell into lockstep. Yes, yes. Go ahead and blather on about “thought terminating cliches” and all that other forum newspeak. Keep up the stale old “you have no friends and are socially underdeveloped” comeback. You write my responses for me – I get to just sit back, watch and laugh.
I’m off to the beach. Have fun, losers.
Should a dissociative person be held responsible for the actions their current personality is unaware of? Based on the theory of agency or free will, no. But based on my purely pragmatic principles, yes, they should.
–
The thing is, I highly doubt she’s really dissociative. Sounds more like borderline personality caused by abuse. But, you know, borderline personality is like a psychological death sentence and dissociative personality is hip and cool. So of course she prefers the latter diagnosis.
Nevermind, she decided to reveal that aspect of herself before I could warn…
Oh, and Jane, I think this response got lost in cyberspace, but:
“$4.00 is what Walmart charges for antibiotics, you lackwit.”
Wrong. Check your facts before you open your fekking pie hole, bi#ch. But you’ll probably need another hefty dose of antibiotics soon too, so it’s all good.
She is also very determined to tell us that we are pathetic for being here while she is here, however, she is excused from being pathetic because she is going to the beach. But she keeps posting instead of actually going…
Yeah, weird, huh? She was going to the beach at 11, and here it is almost two hours later. Maybe she went and came back and just forgot? Hey, CSL, YOU AREN’T DISSOCIATIVE.
–
How many of these apply to you?
1. Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. [Not including suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5]
2. A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
3. Identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.
4. Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., promiscuous sex, eating disorders, binge eating, substance abuse, reckless driving). [Again, not including suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5]
5. Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, threats, or self-mutilating behavior such as cutting, interfering with the healing of scars (excoriation) or picking at oneself.
6. Affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days).
7. Chronic feelings of emptiness, worthlessness.
8. Inappropriate anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights).
9. Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation, delusions or severe dissociative symptoms
–
You have borderline personality disorder. You need intensive treatment with drugs and behavioral therapy.
Aww, you guys are so cute when you get all psychiatrist-y.
Hey, Dorkboy, why so panty-twisted? Miss Piggy “accidentally” switch up the ball gag and the anal plug again? Is the boy starting to ask questions about why none of the other kids have to pick “dinner” out of mommy and daddy’s hair? Baby not growing into his tail yet? Hairline still receding at light speed? Damn, sucks to be you.
What are you trying to achieve here, CSL? What is your goal? Do you think you are achieving your goal? I’m honestly curious, why are you even here?
That is an interesting list. Let’s see how much I can line up.
1. I am the first person to ever ditch her instead of the other way around.
2. Any ex she had was some form of evil scum from the darkest bile pits but she would also go into deep periods of missing a certain number of them.
3. Would constantly freak out at the remotest implication that she was crazy (real or imagined) yet would constantly use her disorder as an excuse not to make any damn sense. Also was horribly disturbed by pictures of herself.
4. Bulemic before I met her. The sexual one I am unsure of because she was trying to convince me she was a virgin for some unfathomable reason and then would talk about how much sex she had so I can’t be definite.
5. She would carve on herself and then make threats about more or try to do mental torture by going into detail while I was trying to get her not to.
6. She would go from intensely considerate and caring to completely apathetic and verbally abusive.
7. Oh god yes… And lots of them. Even after I cut things off, she had contacted me more than once stating that she had od’d on sleeping meds and needed me to keep her awake by talking to her.
8. Well, when I first broke it off, she stated that she understood what happened and while she understood that I had to do it, she wasn’t mad. Even thanked me for being there for her for the months we were close. Then that snapped off after a couple emails and she more or less became what we see here ever since. This isn’t her first place she has followed and spent her time sniping at me.
9. I’ll let you view exhibit A in front of us here.
@Woowoo: Don’t you have a beach to visit? As for panty twisted, which one of us is stalking the other? I thought so…
You previously mentioned encountering toilet paper rougher than me. Ya know, that might be the problem at hand. I suggest buying the normal stuff and to stop shopping for bathroom supplies at Ace Hardware…
Thought so. Man that sucks for her, borderline personality is very, very tough to treat. It is usually caused by some pretty heinous abuse at a very young age. It used to be considered pretty much untreatable but nowadays the drugs/talk therapy route has seen some success.
She was in therapy last I checked but I was also being mentioned as an abusive element who was just trying to bring her down to my level. So either I am the devil or she is lying. She lied to me more than once so I don’t know. *shrugs* I won’t state that I was an angel but I was not remotely a demon. Nor can I think of anything realistic that would warrant this level of stalking bile. Lynn and I honestly try to pretend she doesn’t exist and avoid her when possible.
She never did tell me about any heinous abuse though and she pretty much told me everything… :/
Well hopefully things will work out. I just want her happy and out of my hair.
I hear you. Was there maybe some serious neglect? That can cause it too. Or she could be blocking it out and not even remember the abuse.
Not a clue, as far as I know, her parents were pretty good to her. So I would have no idea.
It seems like a very sad situation. You can see how her mental stability degenerated as the thread went on. More and more personal attacks and insults, lack of coherency in her posts, so on. The really sad thing about treatable mental illnesses is how often the patient goes off their medication when they think they are cured. My cousin is bi-polar and she constantly taking herself off her meds because she thinks she doesn’t need them anymore. Sad situation all the way around, sorry she’s fixated on you DWN, but I think you know that there is nothing you could have done to prevent this.
That is the part that really galls me too. We pretty much careened into each other online and had great chemistry, I really wish I had caught the signs earlier though. Might have helped minimize the damage.
My mom always says that you can’t save people who don’t want to be saved. Until she’s ready to admit she has a problem and stick with the treatment her behavior is only going to escalate. She may eventually end up fixating on someone else, but she’s never going to live a normal life until she realizes what her self-destructive behavior is doing. I mean, initially the whole thread seemed pretty funny, but when you actually go back and see her unraveling at the seams with every post it makes me really pity her.
I am just glad she actually wandered off this time. It gets rather depressing to see exactly what she is like from outside of it all.
I think that might, in fact, have been his offer.
Ok, I was with until you got to Albuquerque.. their standards are much lower.
Fetishist? I think you find me more extreme than I really am or are making a couple assumptions that aren’t that accurate. I can see why you made them but no, bondage, domination, and sadism are not fetishes for me. They are in my relationship because Lynn wants a good flogging, being controlled, and tied up.
I was always odd.
No idea where this will nest but too long; didn’t bother reading. Can’t take it seriously with all the booga booga about the wind and the Dr. Philisms.
Iron Maiden? WOOO!!! Never heard of Anal Pear before, though. Are they, like, death metal?
Nah, folky-acoustic stuff.
The do have electric banjos though.
Ooh, Alternative Bluegrass.. I’m liking it.
are you really trying to get us to feel sorry for oj?
Nope. I’m trying to get people not to take glee in cruel and unusual punishment.
Laudable, but we must not go too far in the other direction, lest we lose the ability to feel satisfaction at seeing justice done.
No. It is wrong to take satisfaction in seeing justice done. Upholding justice is a necessary evil. Losing empathy for the perpetrator is just as wrong as losing empathy for anyone. Uphold justice, but take no more pride in doing so than you have for taking a dump. I know that is a hard line to take, and I fail at it all the time. I have a very strong sense of justice, and I feel satisfaction when I am able to punish unfairness and wrongdoing. But I know that attitude is unhealthy and will lead me to commit injustice myself. If I am doing it for the satisfaction, there is a temptation to find more and more things unjust, just to get my fix. Also, the habit of judging people and the habit of judging oneself are the same habit. When I habitually judge others, it is easier to do it to myself. If I do it to myself, I will not want to look at my own injustice, because then I will need to punish myself. Because I refuse to admit it, I will keep doing it. If I refrain from judging, I can look at my behavior with eyes wide open, and change that which is not correct.
If it were wrong to take satisfaction in Justice, then Justice itself would be wrong. Justice is necessary for the good of society, therefore I would say that it is fine to take pride and satisfaction in the correct application thereof. Just because something is harmful when taken to an extreme doesn’t mean that there’s anything wrong with the thing itself when it exists in proper balance.
I fear that this philosophy of timidity, of applying justice apologetically, will lead us to the kind of things you see in Britain, where the criminal sues the victim for stopping the crime.
Did you miss the part where I explained how taking pleasure in Justice leads to imbalance, or do you simply disagree with that part, because you didn’t address that at all.
I believe I did address it. “Just because something is harmful when taken to an extreme…”
Love of Justice is fine in and of itself, just like many other things. We just have to keep ourselves in check, lest we begin to go too far. I enjoy a glass of scotch every now and then. If I were to take that love too far and enjoy a bottle or two every night, I would do myself (and potentially others) great harm. Should I cease to drink a glass of scotch every now and then?
If you are comparing the love of justice to an addiction, I think we’re on the same page.
Upholding justice isn’t a necessary evil; that’s part of what makes it “justice” instead of simple retribution. Keep in mind that “justice” in the abstract sense isnt just about punishing wrongdoing – it’s about being equitable, fair, and morally right.
Taking satisfaction in seeing justice done is also taking satisfaction in seeing a firefighter rewarded for rescuing people from a burning building, or your average citizen recognized for an act of charity.
The problem (I think) is that too many people seem to think that it’s only about punishment, because that’s where they get their righteous thrills. And that once you land in prison, you obviously deserve whatever happens to you.
That assumes that you were fairly sentenced. There are a lot of people in prison whose offenses didn’t merit it. Still, for those fairly sentenced, prison is what it is. Sending someone to prison and then acting surprised about the involuntary man-love… well, that’s like sentencing a person to be air-dropped naked into the jungle and acting shocked (SHOCKED!) that they got devoured.
That’s not accurate at all.
We own and run our prisons. They have guards, and infrastructure; they’re not anarchistic pits of villainy where we mindlessly dump our troublemakers only to grudgingly release those who survive ’til the end of their sentences as part of some dystopian reinvention of “The Running Man” (or at least, that’s not how it’s supposed to work). They’re correctional facilities.
The punishment intended in a prison sentence is the loss of freedom; to my knowledge no publicly-recognized theory of justice involves the just sentence described as “Let’s throw you in a box with a bunch of other criminals and see what happens.”
The law isn’t suspended within the walls of a prison. To dismiss the crimes committed there as “business as usual” is (IMO) at least a little cynical, and to take glee in them is at least a little grotesque.
“Losing empathy for the perpetrator is just as wrong as losing empathy for anyone.” that part lead me to an interesting thought about the different ways people see criminals. I have a slightly kantian view. A criminal, once they perform an inhuman act on another is, inhuman, they shouldn’t be treated as human. I am a bit more forgiving if they honestly seem sorry, but for those that write “if i did it”…inhuman
Buddhist monks imprisoned in China and tortured for years reported that the greatest difficulty they faced was the struggle not to lose empathy with their tormentors. Just because someone is a criminal does not mean they aren’t human. There are reasons for all human behavior, and simply saying ‘They are bad’ or ‘they are inhuman’ does not explain why the person did what they did. Nothing that happens in life is personal. Everything in life has the meaning you choose to give it. Nothing more, nothing less. The desire is to ensure that injustice doesn’t happen. If we focus on the pleasures of punishing injustice, we ignore the true goal: prevention. We need to understand people’s motivations in order to help prevent harmful actions. We can’t understand their actions unless we can empathize with them.
So you’re asking people to be open minded and non-judgmental?
And you say punishment should be in the name of justice, not revenge?
What’s that boy? Timmy fell down a well?
I agree with you as usual Seth. Damn you and your common sense.
Forgetting OJ for a moment, Seth, while I have respect for your position I can’t help but think that you’re approaching crime and punishment in a rather emotionally sterile manner.
I’ve linked to a local news story from last year regarding the autopsy results from a mass homicide we had in my city. The killer was on parole for a previous murder, got into an argument with his younger brother, and killed him. Oh, and everyone else in the house, including two young children. He also viciously attacked the other three kids in the house with clear intent to leave no witnesses; however, those three managed to survive, badly injured, lying in the house with their dead parents and siblings for several days until they were discovered. One of them was able to identify the killer.
And what I’m asking you, Seth, is what, exactly, constitutes justice here? Read those babies’ autopsy reports, and you tell me.
The way I approach the issue is anything but emotionally sterile. Trust me, I have the same inclinations and feelings as other people. I feel good when justice is done. Very good. This is a false attachment, a hindrance to right action. Feeling empathy for the perpetrators is very difficult for me. I have to work at it, especially in certain situations. Like getting cut off while driving. Weird, huh? It’s easier for me to maintain empathy towards a murderer than it is to maintain empathy towards a guy who cut me off in traffic. Because the murderer is anomaly, obviously pathological, and the guy who cut me off ‘should know better.’
–
You’ve heard the phrase ‘Love the sinner, hate the sin?’ That is the approach I try to take. The crime you describe is heinous. The perpetrator should not be allowed to harm others, and society should take steps to ensure that. Should we hate the man? That would be easy. It would be easy for me to hate someone who did that. But it wouldn’t be an effective way for me to live my life. If I were in his shoes, with his genetics, having lived his life, I would have killed those children too. There is no way I could have done otherwise, if the circumstances were exactly the same, the outcome would be the same.
–
Moral judgment stems from the logical error of dualism. From thinking of things as separate from the universe they inhabit. Seeing things as separate, we believe they can become unbalanced and unfair. We desire fairness and balance, and so we invent all kinds of stories that attempt to restore balance. God, karma, the afterlife, the soul: all these concepts exist because of the original logical fallacy, dualism. In a non-dualistic worldview, things can never be out of balance or unfair. They just are.
–
Would you punish the avalanche, or the flood? If not, why not? Because they aren’t separate from the universe, they just happen, and it’s easy to see there’s nothing personal there. The same is true for ourselves and other people, whether we see it or not.
Hmm. I appreciate the thoughtful answer, Seth, and I’m going to have to think on that, I guess. Your description of a non-dualistic universe seems fatalistic; is that a correct interpretation?
I mean is my interpretation of what you are saying correct; that was a little unclear.
In a way, yes, In another way, emphatically no, because the whole ‘free will/determinism’ paradox disappears without dualism. Do “I” choose my own path, or is it chosen for me by some outside agency? No “I”, no outside agency. No predestination, no free will.
Thanks for the clarification.
If you do not choose your own path, but rather circumstance and genetics choose it for you, then why do we have a legal system at all? How can we possibly hold someone accountable for what they do, if they were going to do it regardless?
-
You’re on a very slippery with that reasoning, Seth. As much as I respect your opinion in most things here, I think you’re wrong on this one.
Of course we can hold them accountable. It isn’t about punishment, it is about logical consequences. It’s not about right and wrong, it’s about contracts. Morality is enlightened pragmatism. We have moral feelings because genetically, it is advantageous to love and to cooperate.
–
We agree to the golden rule because it makes sense, but the actual contract is a little more complicated. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, were you in there shoes. You do not want others to limit your freedom, therefore, you need to refrain from limiting the freedoms of others and stop those who do limit other’s freedoms.
–
When you steal something that another worked for, you are taking away a freedom that they earned fairly: to use the thing. When you abuse and hurt, you take away the natural freedom or state of not being in pain. When you murder, you take away ALL freedom.
–
What does it matter if the universe is predestined or we have true freedom of choice? We can’t see the future anyhow. We can never know all the consequences, good and bad, of even our simplest actions. We can’t control our past. We are, free will or no, enmeshed in a vast and unknowable web of cause and effect that is fundamentally unknowable and beyond our control.
–
Let me try to put this in Christian terms, froofrou. When you judge others, when you give in to that feeling and it is different than discernment, which is a mental process, you usurp God’s place. It is not for you to judge God’s works or his plans. It is for you to give thanks and praise just to witness the glory. Do you not trust your God, froofrou?
Hey hey hey, I didn’t ask for a dissertation, I was just responding to the ‘Should we punish the avalanche or the flood’
-
And yes, I trust my God. My God has told me that ‘Vengeance is Mine, says the Lord.’ I’m down with that. It is not up to me to judge, but it is up to our leaders and those we choose to put in power to enforce what laws we have now. Were we to have no laws, and no code of conduct, then you’re right about not being able to punish, because there would be no law to break. But, since our leaders have come up with a code of conduct that dates back to Hammurabi and Moses, then I think we should probably take some of that seriously, especially since it seems to be the only thing in some cases that keeps certain people from behaving as barbarians.
Not up to you to judge! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA!
Preach it, sweet’ums!
Aw look, it’s a sock. They’re so cute when they think they matter.
Hee hee! A sock. Everyone who thinks you’re a hypocrity just has to be a sock, becuase the rest of the world jsut HAS to love you.
You’re a great Christian, aren’t you now?
I’m not only a great Christian, I’m the BEST Christian, don’t you know. I have a direct line to God, and all that jazz.
You are a great Christian, froo. You try to do your best, that’s all any of us can do. Learning to forgive and to love isn’t easy, but I can see that you try.
I am going to call bullshit on a couple things here. While we do live in a world of vast unknowables, we still have a damn good idea of what will happen next. If we lived in a completely undeterminable existence of chaos, nothing would be done and we wouldn’t be on computers.
Computers work because a number of variables line up in such a certain predictable way to be mass produced. If I stab a living creature in a vital area, there is a high probability that it will die. Even in a state of anger, I technically have the capacity to give in or to keep it under wraps. I can grant mercy because I have control or I can choose to keep anger because I control that too.
I know there are repercussions for actions. Reaction for action. I don’t necessarily know exactly what will happen when I punch random person on the street but I have the brain capacity to realize that said random person is highly likely to be very, very annoyed and take action accordingly.
I don’t seek restitution from the thunderstorm because the thunderstorm isn’t acting, it simply is. A hurricane isn’t mad or out to get anybody, it simply is there because the conditions came together and move it along. It isn’t motivated.
I will seek restitution from a person for their actions. Sure there can be circumstantial issues but they still made a choice, a choice that isn’t as ignorant of reaction as you seem to encourage me to believe.
There is nothing wrong with seeking restitution, DWN. IN fact, it’s rather important that society allows and encourages that in an impartial way. I’m not claiming the world is random, I’m saying the map is not the territory. You can never know for sure if your map is completely correct. I’m talking about the limits of knowledge. You claim that you ‘technically’ have the capacity to either give in or keep your anger under wraps. How do you know this? And more importantly, how do you know that is true in all situations? Is your ability to keep it under wraps influenced by conditions? If you are tired and stressed out, will you have the same level of patience as when you are calm and rested? What if you get sick, or you brain gets damaged? Will you still have exactly the same capacity?
–
A person is no more ‘acting’ than a thunderstorm is. A persons actions come from causes. Concrete and potentially knowable causes. If you could look inside a persons brain, you would find ALL the causes that produce their action. You could know exactly why they made the choices they did. You would not be able to find a ‘choice’ that is caused by anything external to the material world.
–
I am not saying that people shouldn’t be held accountable. Of course they should. Because holding them accountable is also part of the unbroken chain of cause and effect. It will have an effect on them. It may alter how they behave in the future, and in any case, if wrong was done and freedom removed, then perhaps the perpetrator can be forced to make it right, insofar as that is possible. One does not need to ascribe agency or free will to a person to hold them accountable. It’s a purely pragmatic matter, though.
Ah but a person is forward thinking and thus can think and plan ahead. That is why a crime of passion is slightly less punished than a premeditated act. A thunderstorm doesn’t plan ahead, it simply exists in that moment because after that storm pass, it is done. It isn’t contemplating its next move.
Even though a person cannot completely plot out the future, they can still plan for it and set contingencies. People do that all the time, it is why we have holidays and calenders. It is because a person can think and plan that we have free will even if we are cast adrift in chaos, we still can make choices based off information we already have and predictions made off of that information. As a living thing with enough intellect and forward thinking, a person can take past events and make a prediction upon the future. Before they act upon that prediction, they can also check other data of other people’s pasts to refine their hypothesis before they act. A storm does not have any of that. The actions of a person and the actions of a storm are two completely different types of events. That is how a person has free will.
Free will is an illusion. As I said before, the ideas of free will and determinism come from dualistic thinking. The idea of a separate self comes from dualistic thinking. Free will and predetermination are ideas, concepts that do not exist in reality, outside of the human mind. You are not separate from the univers, so the idea of ‘you’ having a ‘free will’ is just as silly as the idea that ‘your actions’ are ‘predetermined.’
Never stated that I am seperate from the universe, I just know that I make choices while a raging storm does not. I don’t make the world as I see fit, never said that I did. I simply stated that I decide if I move forward or backwards. I think I am saying free will and perhaps meaning something else. I always did have an odd way of defining things. I am simply stating that I make the choices in my life, for good or ill. Circumstances can apply pressure and even win while I try to make choices but the fact remains that I still have the capacity to choose my path, even if I don’t like any of the options.
I’ve had moments of intense anger where I was ready to cancel everything, tell everybody where they can go, and just disappear into some hole in the world. Probably wouldn’t have made it too far down the road but the fact remained that I held it in check. Instead of becoming a situation, I forced myself to calm down and assess new data to make a more informed decision. That is free will to me. I decided whether or not to remain angry and ruin everything or to calm down. I’ve also made drastic actions born of anger and lost my best friend for a while. However, I chose to make amends and we are pretty okay again.
I don’t think I am apart from the universe. I just don’t think I drift along aimlessly unless I chose to. Even then, I still have to struggle along like everybody else because the universe will apply its strong measure of pull.
So perhaps I need to stop and ask what exactly you think I mean…
You know, recent experiments show that decisions happen before we are aware of them and we make up a story as to why we did something after the fact. My favorite one is where the researcher shows you pictures of two people of the opposite sex and asks you which one you think is more attractive. They then pull a sleight of hand, reversing the pictures. Finally, they ask you to explain why you thought the one you picked was more attractive. People do not go ‘Hey, that’s not the one I picked!’ They make up a reason to explain why they ‘picked’ the one they didn’t pick.
–
I wasn’t claiming we drift aimlessly. Choices happen. But they don’t come out of nothing. They don’t come from the soul, or the self. The come fro the sum total of the forces acting on them. When you truly see yourself as one with the universe, you will see that it is as silly to say “I made that choice” as it is to say, “The universe made that choice for me.”
–
In order for us to have real free will, we have to imagine that, if we could go back to the moment of choice, with everything else the same, we could possibly make a different choice than we did. I say we can’t.
That is the oddest thing I ever heard. I didn’t make up a story after the fact. I made the choice at hand because I thought about it and made it into action.
I am not one with the universe. I am part of the universe. While I am interconnected, I am still responsible for my own choices and actions. My actions do make a chain of events that can’t be broken with time travel but I still made the choices.
For me, free will doesn’t mean I can change what has happened. It merely means that I can make a choice based off those events. My will is free to make a determination but that determination is binding. I consider the universe to have a no return policy. Just because I zigged instead of zagged doesn’t mean I get a “do-over.” It means I made my choice but I have to stick to it.
So I think we are aggressively agreeing on how things work but not how to actually phrase it… We aren’t gods with free will, we are still just people. We still have to follow the rules of the universe. Action and reaction. We make choices but they are binding. I can’t take back a murder but I choose to do it or not in the first place. It is why I have refrained from saying a lot of things with a bit of introspection before hitting post. Especially after some of my previous disasters here. You state that I am just following the flow of my motions but I simply feel that I am applying what I learned.
The universe as deciding for you just seems like a very irresponsible way to think about decisions. But eh, like I said, I think we are actually bickering more semantics than anything else. :/
Let me ask you something so I can get a clearer sense of your position. You are in some situation, and you make a choice. Is it theoretically possible that you could have made a different choice, or is the choice you made determined by the circumstances (including your nature, your experiences, genetics, the phase of the moon, everything?) I say your choice is entirely determined by circumstances both internal and external. I believe that nothing is a thing unto itself, that everything exists precisely because the conditions necessary and sufficient for its existence arise.
–
If the flow of your motions includes applying what you learned, what is the difference? I think you are still looking at this dualistically.
I need to find a news story I read just the other day about the difference between having free will and not having it. The gist of the story is that when people believe that they have no choice, they are meaner and more aggressive. If, however, they believe they can make the decision, they tend to be more compassionate and kinder to those around them.
-
Whether or not we actually have it, according to that story, it seems important that we at least have the illusion of free will.
Actually I have found that my life has had a number of areas where I could have made a different choice. Simply disregarding my life experiences as a direct path is actually a tad invalidating to the choices I had to make to get there.
So yes, I could have made different choices given the same information. I have made choices based off whim without any sense of cause. A person is not the sum of their experiences. A thinking being can be more than their experiences. I’ve known people who have experienced similar horror to me and have radically different perspective. Example yourself and myself. Two individuals who have experienced horror. I think a person is what they make themselves as they possess free will but have to deal with the universe as well. I also am a very bitter individual who believes reality is what it is no matter what any of us think. No amount of free will will change the overlying truth.
It is like that I could be a crossroads and about to reveal my choice in right or left when I am struck dead by lightning. I had free will, the universe just doesn’t give a damn.
And I am looking at this dualistically because I am different than hurricane. The hurricane feels no past or present. It is an event. It has no emotions and doesn’t care if it happens or if it will happen a million times. I, do feel the weight of my past and the weight of my future decisions. I don’t find being dualistic between me and a hurricane is that inaccurate since I actually give a damn and the hurricane does not.
*somewhere, a hurricane is having a fit because I invalidated its feelings*
Froofrou, you have hit on why the illusion of free will is important. On the smeantic level where it is important, it is real and it exists. We all know the feeling of having a choice, and the feeling of not having a choice. We like the first one, and we don’t like the second. Oddly though, if there are too many similar choices, the feeling is often unpleasant.
–
Nobody enjoys having their free will limited through coercion or force. But we subjugate our own free will through coercion all the time. That is what we are doing when we punish ourselves, we are using coercion on ourselves. Only people who use coercion on themselves can be coerced by
others. Thus the saying, ‘judge not lest ye be judged.’ You can’t judge others without judging yourself.
smeantic. That’s a good one. semantic level, sigh. Mardon me, padam.
I prefer Smeantic. It gives me a mental image of Captain Hook’s First Mate jumping around like an idiot
@dwn: You are like a cat. I’m pointing at the food and you
look at my finger. Subject, meet object.
Imagine your life is a movie, with many tracks.
Audio, video, smell, taste, feelings, thoughts.
All tracks on the movie. And no one is watching it.
Sense of self is just another track on the movie.
And no one is watching it.
The ship is in a storm, and no one is at the helm.
It’s like dying.
Which is all fine and good but it is being watched. Sense of self is being viewed by the self. So somebody is watching it. Those around me are watching the same track from a different camera angle. However the script isn’t written and done impromptu. Still denote free will. The Universe is the set and we are all just bad extras.
Nice analogy.
Seth, DWN, a comic for you both
[LINK]
@Froofrou: Thus explaining why I lack sympathy for a number of people…
Nice Dilbert, froo. Very to the point. The honest truth is that we can not know whether or not we have free will in a philosophical sense but we all know what it feels like to have our choices limited. Smeantic levels and all that. In the end it doesn’t matter whether we do or don’t have anything like free will. It doesn’t matter if the universe is predestined or not. It doesn’t matter whether we have a personal soul, whether there is a watcher or none. It doesn’t matter if there is a God. It doesn’t matter because we can never know the answers for sure, whatever our feelings may say. It doesn’t matter because none of the possible answers to those questions should matter in how we live our lives.
@seth
it was just interesting to see the different ways of looking at it. I certainly agree that prevention is the key and most crime’s boil down to human nature, but i also think that serial murderers and people that commit horrendous crimes are going against human nature, that you can’t prevent shit like that, and when a person willingly takes the life of another for no reason without any sign of remorse they aren’t human and shouldn’t be treated as such.
Now I know very well that my theory has holes, and I don’t expect to go back to painful torturous deaths because we can’t be sure, but sometimes it does feel good to think that there is a balance between good and evil, and a bad man will have bad things happen.
It isn’t satisfying to think they are getting hurt, it is satisfying to think karma is working.
When you take satisfaction in karma working, you create attachment to karma working in certain ways that you can perceive and judge as good. You create more karma. Big wheel keeps on turnin’. But you can step off and not generate any karma. You don’t have to, you can keep on generating attachments, which generate pain. Nothing wrong with pain. If you are into that sort of thing.
I dunno, I kind of lose my ability to sympathize with egomaniacal murderers…
Of course you do. That’s natural. And not ‘wrong.’ just ineffective, for the reasons I outline above.
And, I think this does not bother me because he will never actually get harmed in prison. A high profile prisoner like him? Hah. Not likely.
The expression on his face seems to indicate he is enjoying the exam.
I just want to put this out there: OJ is NOT going to be raped in prison. Not once. First, nobody in there is going to judge him for what he did, crime of passion, and he’s not a child molester or anything. Second, he’s OJ. That means he’s a sports star, and that he’s pretty big. Oh, and you know, his complexion. Lots more people that look like him in prison than there should be. He’s going to be SO popular, in a PLATONIC way. Nobody is going to mess with him, he’s going to get favors, the guards will probably treat him better, you name it. And we know this, don’t we? Once again, justice is not really going to be done, just because he’s OJ. And all we can do about it is make jokes.
The lady behind them seems a tad exasperated.
I don’t see a guy as big as OJ having a problem in prison. The guy did play in the NFL for several years, obviously he’s not still in the condition he was, but he’s no shrimp.
*Glances at posts above* Whatever. This one’s funny and I’m sure there are plenty of gay people who would think so too.
I didn’t say it wasn’t funny…
And what does sexual orientation have to do with anything?
Looking over everything, I don’t think that was really directed at you, Steve.
I could see where Steve might think it was directed at him. However, MW did indicate the plural ‘posts’ which would have been a clue that he was taking everthing into consideration.
I’m actually thinking it may have been a nesting fail, as it looks to me to mostly be in response to Seth and Miranda’s posts at the top. I could be wrong, though.
Gah. Minerva. Where the hell did I get Miranda?
*smacks self in face*
Ah…I suppose you could omit the first line of my reply, and the second line would stand alone just fine.
Can’t you just say I’m sure plenty of people think it’s funny? Who cares if they’re black/white/gay/straight/european/martian…
(Since text doesn’t convey emotion, I’m saying this in a purely quizzical tone, not being defensive)
I think it was because of Minerva’s comment about it being homophobic.
In reply to those who replied to my comment….
I wasn’t talking to you Steve, though I get why you thought I was.
It wasn’t a nesting fail, though I get why you would think so dissimilitude.
Eddie, thanks for catching the plural and pointing it out.
I didn’t read all of the comments on this page but the ones I did seemed to take this far too seriously. It’s a joke. If it’s not funny it’s fine to say “I don’t think it’s funny” but damn, it IS a joke. Of course, it’s also fine to say whatever you want, but I’m not going to waste my time reading all of it. I’m an arrogant American I’ve got things to do like forgetting which country Africa is in.
It’s in Uruguay you dummy.
No Uruguay. And don’t call me names you homophobe.
Don’t call me homophobe you hobophone!
hobophone? is that like a mouthharp?
It’s more like an eletelephone.
Is that like mouth herpes?
LOL!
Yeah, me too! *forgets which country I am in*
He’s going to find out why they call it, “The Pokey”.
That’s very immature. And very funny. And that’s what I’m talkin’ about folks.
Now that was a nesting fail.
right upfront i apologize if this nests wrong, never having tried to post before HOWEVER that is the last thing i apologize for. i have read the posts before this and some are wonderfully thought provoking and give me hope for intelligent life on Earth (looking at you Seth). at the same time i admit to rolling my eyes at people not being able to appreciate karma. am i a regressive Neandarthal? quite possibly so, but i unashamedly admit i take great joy in oj’s pain, and hope that there is much of it, along with degradation and humiliation, all because he deserves it. i make no excuses for stating i laughed out loud at the pic, and no it’s not homophobic, it’s hmmm, “murdererphobic” if you will. cruel and unusual punishment, well, i understand the prohibition against it, but get real, the original crime he got away with was cruel and unusual, if this is what it takes for justice to be served then i say GOOD !
I’m not actually saying that the feelings you have about justice are ‘wrong’ or ‘bad.’ They exist for a reason, as do all of our feelings. They help us survive and work together as a society. However, those feelings can lead one astray, especially when it comes to personal growth. If we judge others, we judge ourselves. If we judge ourselves, we hide from our own guilt. If we hide from our guilt, we can not change. The feelings of judgment, condemnation, and outrage that we feel at injustice and unfairness are, on one level, natural and good and lead to a more harmonious world. On another level, those feelings are false guides, and a prison for the mind and the heart.
Do you have a clone? If so, is your clone single? could you send him my way?
well i DO judge myself all the time, i find nothing wrong with judging, or as i like to refer to it, discernment. in fact i am far happier having my sense of outrage intact, and my sense of guilt, they have forced me kicking and screaming to do the right thing when it would be easier to do nothing. what you seem to be espousing is a rather Buddhist outlook, and i can respect that. i just don’t buy it. if oj way back when would have had my sense of outrage at injustice well, he’d not be turning into Mrs Bubba in his jail cell.
Discernment is wonderful! I do THAT all the time. Especially self-discernment. My point is that the emotion of judgment and moral condemnation interferes with discernment. And OJ is a case in point, his sense of outrage and injustice led him to kill people. What makes yours better than his?
why because *I* am god and he isn’t.
hmmm, ok to give a serious answer, i guess because i am willing to question my motives and examine my reasons, and they have nothing to do with pridefulness or greed. well, that and an adherance to the Rede: an it harm none, do what ye will. (oh and i might add that phrase does not mean do what you WANT, it refers to something deeper, which i won’t even attempt to explain here, just mentioning in passing.)
Love under will, I can dig it. Crowley’s a hoot, if you don’t take him too seriously. You seem to be perfectly aware of the dangers of blindly following your desire for justice, and capable of applying introspection, so, erm, my work here is done?