Why do we still put people in prison?

[DrZoidberg]

When I wrote this: 'When two individuals have a difference of opinion then that's 'intolerance', isn't it?', you'll note the inverted commas; they were intended to suggest that if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?? It was a nuance, in other words.

But it's wrong. Being tolerant of one another doesn't mean we're all in agreement. Toleration is about being fine with other people having different opinions than you. The degree of agreement has nothing to do with the degree of intolerance. Any group of people where everybody agrees is quite often an intolerant atmosphere. Just my little observation from life.

 

[Cerberus]

When I wrote this: 'When two individuals have a difference of opinion then that's 'intolerance', isn't it?', you'll note the inverted commas; they were intended to suggest that if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?? It was a nuance, in other words.

But it's wrong. Being tolerant of one another doesn't mean we're all in agreement. Toleration is about being fine with other people having different opinions than you. The degree of agreement has nothing to do with the degree of intolerance. Any group of people where everybody agrees is quite often an intolerant atmosphere. Just my little observation from life.

I agree that my use of the word is tenuous, but nevertheless it does have plausibility, in sense.

 

[bilby]

But it's wrong. Being tolerant of one another doesn't mean we're all in agreement. Toleration is about being fine with other people having different opinions than you. The degree of agreement has nothing to do with the degree of intolerance. Any group of people where everybody agrees is quite often an intolerant atmosphere. Just my little observation from life.

I agree that my use of the word is tenuous, but nevertheless it does have plausibility, in sense.

Translation: I am wrong, but cannot bring myself to admit it, and am hoping you will support my desperate attempt to avoid loss of face.

 

[dystopian]

When I wrote this: 'When two individuals have a difference of opinion then that's 'intolerance', isn't it?', you'll note the inverted commas; they were intended to suggest that if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?? It was a nuance, in other words.

As the lobster already pointed out; this is still wrong. Disagreement does not imply intolerance of the opinion one disagrees with.

Furthermore, by trying to defend the original wrong claim, you're actually making another error when you write "if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?"

If it were true that intolerance is the state of having a difference of opinion... then BOTH of the individuals would necessarily be intolerant.

 

[DrZoidberg]

But it's wrong. Being tolerant of one another doesn't mean we're all in agreement. Toleration is about being fine with other people having different opinions than you. The degree of agreement has nothing to do with the degree of intolerance. Any group of people where everybody agrees is quite often an intolerant atmosphere. Just my little observation from life.

I agree that my use of the word is tenuous, but nevertheless it does have plausibility, in sense.

No, it doesn't. You weren't even close.

 

[fromderinside]

It would be news to me.

I wonder what he meant by that.

He doesn't know he's a prisoner?

 

[Kharakov]

When I wrote this: 'When two individuals have a difference of opinion then that's 'intolerance', isn't it?', you'll note the inverted commas; they were intended to suggest that if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?? It was a nuance, in other words.

Yeah, well, ya know that's just like uhh... your opinion man.

 

[Cerberus]

When I wrote this: 'When two individuals have a difference of opinion then that's 'intolerance', isn't it?', you'll note the inverted commas; they were intended to suggest that if two individuals are in disagreement then one of them is obviously, repeat obviously intolerant of the other one's opinion?? It was a nuance, in other words.

Yeah, well, ya know that's just like uhh... your opinion man.

Why would I give anyone else's opinion?

 

[Trodon]

In the United States during the 1960's the prison population declined. The crime rate doubled. Since 1980 the prison population tripled. The crime rate declined by one third.

http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/lawenforcement/punishment.pdf

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

As far as I am concerned, that is impressive evidence that putting more people in prison does reduce the crime rate.

Other factors influence the crime rate too. In their book Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner argue that the increase in the abortion rate after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision has reduced the crime rate. Their argument is that the same kind of females who are most likely to have abortions are most likely to give birth to babies who grow up to become criminals. They are unmarried, and have low IQ's. Since 1973 millions of potential criminals have been destroyed in the womb.

Nevertheless, the illegitimacy rate has increased. So has the divorce rate. Children raised to adulthood by both biological parents living together in matrimony tend to do much better in life than those raised in other situations.

The increase in illegitimacy and divorce has been caused largely by the sexual revolution. In their book The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind: How Self-Interest Shapes Our Opinions and Why We Won't Admit It Jason Weeden and Robert Kurzban present evidence from the U.S. General Social Survey (GSS) that indicates that when both spouses are virgins when they get married they only have a 15% chance of getting divorced.

Single mothers have more difficulty disciplining their sons than than their husbands would if they were married.

 

[DrZoidberg]

In the United States during the 1960's the prison population declined. The crime rate doubled. Since 1980 the prison population tripled. The crime rate declined by one third.

http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/lawenforcement/punishment.pdf

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

As far as I am concerned, that is impressive evidence that putting more people in prison does reduce the crime rate.

The number you want is the number for recedivism. This is just correlation-does-not-imply-causation. And you also want to prove deterrence somehow. Your numbers don't.

Other factors influence the crime rate too. In their book Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner argue that the increase in the abortion rate after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision has reduced the crime rate. Their argument is that the same kind of females who are most likely to have abortions are most likely to give birth to babies who grow up to become criminals. They are unmarried, and have low IQ's. Since 1973 millions of potential criminals have been destroyed in the womb.

They on the other hand do back up their theory with some proper evidence. Levitt's argument is compelling.

Nevertheless, the illegitimacy rate has increased. So has the divorce rate. Children raised to adulthood by both biological parents living together in matrimony tend to do much better in life than those raised in other situations.

"illegitimacy". Who even uses that word anymore? Who the fuck cares if people are married today? It tells you nothing about their actual lives. Marriages today are almost entirely symbolic. If there is a correlation then that can tell you other stuff. Like people who do well in life like to surround themselves with traditional symbols. I'm not sure how this is meaningful?

The increase in illegitimacy and divorce has been caused largely by the sexual revolution. In their book The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind: How Self-Interest Shapes Our Opinions and Why We Won't Admit It Jason Weeden and Robert Kurzban present evidence from the U.S. General Social Survey (GSS) that indicates that when both spouses are virgins when they get married they only have a 15% chance of getting divorced.

What happened in the sexual revolution was that women started demanding to be respected in relationships, and they were granted rights... like that it was wrong to beat your wife. If the trade-off is more criminally inclined children... then that's a pretty small price to pay. Don't you think? We do have a better world now.

Single mothers have more difficulty disciplining their sons than than their husbands would if they were married.

I don't actually think this is true. I'm also sceptical that it's possible to test this scientifically.

 

[fromderinside]

Single mothers have more difficulty disciplining their sons than than their husbands would if they were married.

I don't actually think this is true. I'm also skeptical that it's possible to test this scientifically.

It is true within the context of different levels of society within different sub-societies and it can be measured by taking male-female hormonal differences into account within these sub-social bands.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't actually think this is true. I'm also skeptical that it's possible to test this scientifically.

It is true within the context of different levels of society within different sub-societies and it can be measured by taking male-female hormonal differences into account within these sub-social bands.

I did not understand that

 

[fromderinside]

It is true within the context of different levels of society within different sub-societies and it can be measured by taking male-female hormonal differences into account within these sub-social bands.

I did not understand that

Take for instance american society sub-population in LA, then take the Watts and San Fernando valley sub-populations within that population. Social characterization of urban, suburban groupings, economic sub-populations within those, and ethnic sub-populations within these getting down to a socioeconomic characterization of Watts (south central LA basin) versus west San Fernando valley comparisons can be made. Within cultural women led families can be compared.

There will be different juvinile developmental tendencies based on testosterone verses estrogen make ups in the two groups based in no small part social tendencies of upper, middle, and low income families between the Watts and San Fernando groups that will startle. Controls can be found in Latino sub-populations and interbreeding and social commerce in the eastern portions of both populations.

OK.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I did not understand that

Take for instance american society sub-population in LA, then take the Watts and San Fernando valley sub-populations within that population. Social characterization of urban, suburban groupings, economic sub-populations within those, and ethnic sub-populations within these getting down to a socioeconomic characterization of Watts (south central LA basin) versus west San Fernando valley comparisons can be made. Within cultural women led families can be compared.

There will be different juvinile developmental tendencies based on testosterone verses estrogen make ups in the two groups based in no small part social tendencies of upper, middle, and low income families between the Watts and San Fernando groups that will startle. Controls can be found in Latino sub-populations and interbreeding and social commerce in the eastern portions of both populations.

OK.

But you're making the leap somewhere that the problem was the lack of discipline from married fathers. That's a huge leap. Those demographic differences can be due to any number of factors or combination of factors.

 

[fromderinside]

Take for instance american society sub-population in LA, then take the Watts and San Fernando valley sub-populations within that population. Social characterization of urban, suburban groupings, economic sub-populations within those, and ethnic sub-populations within these getting down to a socioeconomic characterization of Watts (south central LA basin) versus west San Fernando valley comparisons can be made. Within cultural women led families can be compared.

There will be different juvinile developmental tendencies based on testosterone verses estrogen make ups in the two groups based in no small part social tendencies of upper, middle, and low income families between the Watts and San Fernando groups that will startle. Controls can be found in Latino sub-populations and interbreeding and social commerce in the eastern portions of both populations.

OK.

But you're making the leap somewhere that the problem was the lack of discipline from married fathers. That's a huge leap. Those demographic differences can be due to any number of factors or combination of factors.

Really? I think I put it in such a way that outcomes could be found for either mother's of fathers depending on how you chose to inquire.

My main quarrel with such studies is presumptions guide design rather than pilot study results. Even then, if the pilot study was one's observations of the initial results coming from the presumption set, the results are stillflawed. The study must be driven by experimental assumptions before the experiment is run.

I am saying there are measurable differences between estrogen related actions and testosterone related actions.

 

[DrZoidberg]

But you're making the leap somewhere that the problem was the lack of discipline from married fathers. That's a huge leap. Those demographic differences can be due to any number of factors or combination of factors.

Really? I think I put it in such a way that outcomes could be found for either mother's of fathers depending on how you chose to inquire.

My main quarrel with such studies is presumptions guide design rather than pilot study results. Even then, if the pilot study was one's observations of the initial results coming from the presumption set, the results are stillflawed. The study must be driven by experimental assumptions before the experiment is run.

I am saying there are measurable differences between estrogen related actions and testosterone related actions.

My instinct tells me you are correct. I also believe that. But that's a questionable belief scientifically. It's impossible to separate nature from nurture here. Impossible. Thinking you can isn't being honest with yourself. It's untestable.

 

[fromderinside]

Really? I think I put it in such a way that outcomes could be found for either mother's of fathers depending on how you chose to inquire.

My main quarrel with such studies is presumptions guide design rather than pilot study results. Even then, if the pilot study was one's observations of the initial results coming from the presumption set, the results are stillflawed. The study must be driven by experimental assumptions before the experiment is run.

I am saying there are measurable differences between estrogen related actions and testosterone related actions.

My instinct tells me you are correct. I also believe that. But that's a questionable belief scientifically. It's impossible to separate nature from nurture here. Impossible. Thinking you can isn't being honest with yourself. It's untestable.

Really? So varying testosterone and estrogen levels in specific social environments makes interpreting statements about the social conditions untestable? Ever look at the mouse corn rick studies effects of introducing a male t allele individual into an existing structured mating group. Care to explain why females all come into estrus right after such an event? We've been studying such for over 100 years. I take my position based on logical extension and, if necessary, a short literature search.

Your turn.

 

[Shadowy Man]

In the United States during the 1960's the prison population declined. The crime rate doubled. Since 1980 the prison population tripled. The crime rate declined by one third.

http://www.jacksonprogressive.com/issues/lawenforcement/punishment.pdf

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

As far as I am concerned, that is impressive evidence that putting more people in prison does reduce the crime rate.

Well, another way to do it is to criminalize something relatively harmless that lots of people do, then lock them all up for doing it.

 

[Togo]

I am saying there are measurable differences between estrogen related actions and testosterone related actions.

Is this a correlational link, or a claim of causal effect? If the former, then you're agreeing with Zoidberg, that there is a jump in reasoning from correlation to cause. If the latter, on what basis is the causal link justified?

 

[fromderinside]

Result of experiment using variable manipulation evaluated using inferential statistics. It is an experimentally determined effect. Cause is not at issue.