dimreepr

That's the god of the gaps argument in reverse...

I'm just a confused as you, but then we did vote for Boris...

Your emotions are an excuse, not a reason. All I've suggested is, criminal's are often victim's too... How does it help the victim in your case, if we ignore that fact?

Please explain: Why does it have to have a 100% success rate, to be better than what we have now? And why not? Please don't paraphrase what I said, quote what i said. But for the record, if he did what he did and can't be cured, maybe it's kinder to kill him; especially if he's in the type of prison your advocating... Many comedians have a philosophy too.

As Spike Milligan once said, "your facts are different from my facts"

I'm tempted to say God, but I know what a shit-storm that would create here. 😉

It's a human construct often used as an escuse do "evil". Besides it's not a very scientific answer to my demand, no evidence no counter argument, just gainsay and attempted ridicule. Is a lion evil bc he brutally murder's all the children of a pride he takes over? If the lionesses' use that as an excuse to brutally murder him, they're left with no chance of future children.

Why is it unrealistic, unobtainable and naive?

What error in thinking? " A reasonable justice system does three main things...punish, protect and rehabilitate." I'm saying, A good justice system only needs to protect and try to rehabilitate. By arguing otherwise you're implying I'm wrong, you've yet to explain why. That doesn't mean you have to think the same way as the majority, some call that noise, I prefer independent thinking. I'm not brushing over anything, I'm flat out demanding that evil doesn't exist. Of course their history matters, if you have any hope of improving THE future (if not the perps).

What happens when the "success verb" run's out?

It maybe fair to say, we have a different understanding; but more complete is a question for tomorrow.

Meh, I got insurance... 😉 But it's the definition you are using, ergo... I can only think of one reason you'd attempt dissociate yourself from that definition and hide behind the majority; because you know that definition contains an element of revenge. It also distracts from the fact that you have yet to answer, why my definition is wrong, or not applicable to our society... You do know Trump was a president, right? "so called moral values etc." Sure!!! turn the other cheek, be a good Samaritan, forgive etc. is much worse than, I could shoot someone..., separate children from parent's when they illegally enter the country etc. etc. etc. 🙄 Or as it relates to Australia, separate children from parent's when they're there when we got here... The difference is the base of your emotional rest state. Being content doesn't mean you never get angry or sad, it just means you let it happen and then forget it. Being discontent mean's you can't forget it.

Well, at some point we'll drift past the event horizon...

My point is, contentment can't be stolen but it can be shared; envy, frustration and resentment only steals from you, it doesn't effect me...

Didn't I already address that? "the correct definition of punishment"...

How is that, not your definition of punishment? The difference is the inclusion of punishment in your three point plan; mine means [1]punishment is not needed in a just society. As I've tried to explain throughout this thread, and you've yet to explain why I'm wrong. I've seem to have lost the strike-through feature, so I've used [] to indicated correction's in your statement; FTFY * how can they be inhumane, if the perp is human? I'm not entirely sure I get your meaning, please elaborate.

I don't see why not; we've managed to stop dunking witches in pond's. Besides there's plenty of historical examples of society radically changing for the better; the founding father's had a good stab at it, it's not their fault their blueprint has been cynically manipulated to make criminality a commodity; I suggest we start there at least in the UK/USA. I've no idea about Australia, but at least they've stopped victimising Aboriginal's.

I can't steal contentment from you, and make it my own. But I can steal contentment from you, because you denied me...

No, like I've said before, I'm selfish... I can't steal your happiness/contentment (unless you let me), I have to find it myself; and if I can't, hopefully you'll let me share yours... 😉

And using that description as an excuse to justify your definition of punishment, I'm using it as a reason to try harder. Semantics are important, if you want to understand. “If you wish to strive for peace of soul and happiness, then believe; if you wish to be a disciple of truth, then inquire.” — Friedrich Nietzsche

Imagine LJ has never had a candy bar, and his family just gets by with a little petty theft; if you punish him by making him stand in the corner and after he served his sentence you give him the candy bar, he's far more likely to learn that stealing only achieved him the pain of being singled out (in his mind he probably thinks the rest of the class is laughing at him). What do you think he'll learn, if you also steal away his first ever chance eat a candy bar? Bearing in mind that his family has been teaching, theft is a necessary part of life; ergo he must get better at stealing... Every day is a lesson in life and every action has a consequence, we can never know now if it's going to be good or bad, that's why the past is best place learn about the present. It's far easier to damage society with punishment, if you don't understand the correct definition of punishment. And the odds are stacked against the majority of people getting the fact that most of them are wrong.

What if LJ has learned his lesson from standing in the corner; He might go on to be candy bar moniter? But if you go on to deny him the candy, all you teach him is not to get caught stealing. If you haven't been to room 101, you can't say you wouldn't "turn on Julia and accept Big Brother."

Indeed, their not taught the same or don't think the same; but that doesn't change the fact that they're all human; ergo they're all capable of being human. Much like a worm, trained to eat shit, instead of good old-fashioned, dirt...

You're missing the key variable, not all German's were subjected to the same training...