http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/...ct_gawande

I think the article doesnt give both sides, though it seems quite clear that solitary confinement hurts a person.

Yes, without a doubt long term confinement is torture, wether solitary or not

3 years at ADC-Yuma has gotta be like an associate's is criminal psychology.

It's all fucking torture. One does not isolate the social animal and call it ethical, in my book. From an inside perspective, criminals should get their own Australia. Their own society. The escape and cause lawlessness in our lawful society - and both societies are forced to evolve.

Right. So where will that little chunk of land in the middle of nowhere be located and procured?

Alaska. I actually consider that the naive philosophy of zero-state morality could be applied to technocratic anarchy over the long term with a resultant of virtual utopia where the worst crimes would be an occasional bout of fisticuffs among young males at the community level just as a sorting of individual moral perspective.

But being a strategist does not mean being a dreamer; technocratic anarchy seems only feasible considering tribulation - I'd much prefer to be wrong about tribulation - in which case seeing this America evolve into the democracy of the American dreamer where prisons are still seen as necessary does not offend. Rather, thus deconstruct elements of my t-a to make whatever society I find myself in work better would be good use of the naive philosophy.

And that's what I got, from having been there. Criminals form their own society - let 'em. I remember one time there was gonna be scuffle between little ol' me and the shotcaller because this mick let wetbacks sit on his bunk. Ah... memory lane, where's my shank? Call me Che, K?

That's progress - an active social dynamic - I can't help but see it as an experiment in cultural evolution (natural born mathematician, Johnny is it's all science ) Rather than crime and punishment, I see it as civilization and exile; but there is no "crime" that makes one unhuman, and I think we'll all be better off, the more people realize that.

(December 28, 2011 at 4:56 pm)houseofcantor Wrote: 3 years at ADC-Yuma has gotta be like an associate's is criminal psychology.

It's all fucking torture. One does not isolate the social animal and call it ethical, in my book. From an inside perspective, criminals should get their own Australia. Their own society. The escape and cause lawlessness in our lawful society - and both societies are forced to evolve.

Im all for banishment of rule breakers..of course, my list of laws could easily be written on ones hand. The type of society I advocate has a near non-existant murder rate as well.

It depends. Solitary confinement to where? How does the confined feel about it? Forced solitary confinement of a child in a closet strapped to a fucking potty chair (yes, that happens . . . more than once) is definitely torture. Sending me off to a beautiful deserted island with ample food and medicine . . . not so much.

I don't see it as justice, I see it as vengeance. Being part of a society is accepting my responsibility in the social contract; this seems to me to be a universal consideration. I'm not a "criminal" in the sense of mine being a life of crime; rather it has been one lacking in direction. My society is now Gaia - in less ideal terms America as a citizen and not a criminal - but if it is to be "us" versus "them" in such a regard, I vote for justice and not vengeance.

And justice is, as I see it, an understanding of imbalance rather than a call for complete exclusion. It is one thing to feel as I do that the system of jurisprudence contains ethical paradox; it is quite another to foster an understanding such that paradox is eliminated. This I do with my naive philosophy.

Ever read Mitch Rapp? Sam Harris? A fictional CIA operative and an atheistic Horseman, what is the connection? That at the level of the individual moral will, torture can be justified; in terms of ethical standard, however, torture is something we must all grow beyond. In a fictional scenario, playing head games with a terrorist in order to locate the nuclear warhead counting down to destruction is a literary device of black and white that introduces shades of gray into the moral perspective of the reader. Because I am a strategist, if it were a case of a Mitch Rapp being on my anti-terror squad; I'm going to tell him to do what he considers necessary. I'm not advocating torture, I'm advocating experienced operation. Life is full of "unpleasant realities;" my mind ain't one. I'm not afraid to take a stand based upon experience.

Thing is, there's a lot of "if" in my previous paragraph. As an atheist operating under the identity of houseofcantor, I'm not a counter-terror specialist, I'm a naive philosopher who is simply not afraid of the Abyss because I know that I am the monster; yet I have no need to go Godzilla. Rather, I have a desire to question.

Is vengeance required? That is the American ROI in jurisprudence - vengeance - that I consider it wrong does not make me right. It makes me continually evaluate my own code of ethics.

Quote:So where will that little chunk of land in the middle of nowhere be located and procured?

Any state in the bible belt would suffice.