On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't understand what's odd about that, certainly we need retributive
>> punishment if we don't want to be murdered in our beds.
> I don't understand why anyone could not see that as a glaring violation of
> common sense, except that I think it must be like handedness or gender
> orientation. Why would punishment work in any way if people are determined
> to commit crimes regardless?
If people are determined then if we change them ( fine them, confine them,
kill them, perform surgery on them) or change the environment (make the
possibility of severe punishment more likely) then they're behavior will
change. That's the nature of determinism, change the input and the output
changes, otherwise it wouldn't be deterministic.
> How could punishment act on anything except the will?
As I've said I have no problem with the word "will" and it does act on the
will, if I change things their will will change and either they will no
longer want to commit crimes (fear of punishment) or no longer able to
fulfill the desire of their will because they are in jail or dead.
> Can you punish phosphorus until phosphorus changes?
Yes, I can put it into a fireproof box or combine the phosphorous with
other chemicals and turn it into fertilizer, something that is actually
> I have never seen anyone with such a personal axe to grind about this
>You hate free will.
Well, a lot of quacking ducks can become annoying.
> > It is unworthy of even a hallucinatory status.
John K Clark
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at