I'm talking about the death penalty. So, just to brighten your evening.
Over the centuries the sense of justice and good taste for ethics have evolved, but they have not done the same methods to punish offenders. Changing names ( rehabilitation, correction ,...), even barbaric practices are eliminated, such as torture, but the concepts are always the same: isolation, seclusion, occasionally death, demonstrating the fact that the man and human civilization can reach the moon but you can not bear and a master criminal mind (even when the crime was the result of despair, not of evil). The only weapon that civilized man has at its disposal to fight crime is the moral : an idea is indeed contradictory, and most hackneyed fight crime with crime. Morality, however, can not morally fight and resolve an amoral act, unless exceptions applying to itself (in the same way a chess player can not beat someone who does not adhere to the rules): The penalty for those who kill or rape involves pain, deprivation or death to the same penalties imposed by the criminal to his victim. In short, modern society is accepted amoral behavior when they are turned to crime, legalized by that common sense of Justice, which - as mentioned at the beginning - changes and evolves over time according to custom and existing companies. But the moral theory should not justify amoral behavior, though seemingly natural, legitimate or justifiable, given that such exceptions will enshrine inefficiency, relativity, the uncertainty of whether it is in fact a bad publicity for posterity ...
The prison is a temporary patch, but it does nothing but try to limit the damage, not solving the problem at its root (which is the culture crime ). As a temporary patch, the prison door, brings a set of unavoidable collateral problems, dilemmas ethics that arise from defects in the original solution has the ethical point of view: the segregation of prisoners as a restriction of individual freedom, and violence in prisons as a safety valve for the inevitable stress and deprivation, the possible exploitation of labor of prisoners, the death penalty itself as the ultimate court of guilt and effective deterrent and elegant solution to the problem of overcrowded prisons. Structural defects that can only be filled by other exceptions, from other documents, in combinatorial explosion of additional grounds for further problems.
This method does not work then it is ripe to act on humans, which is unlikely species may change if born and raised in a society that - as a real cause of crime - has led him where he is now. E 'therefore necessary to change society itself, and society will not only change with the laws and taxes, but mainly thanks to a revolutionary movement: an epochal rift between the new generation (a carrier of a persuasive alternative to the present) and old, with her frantic need for repression and (self-) preservation. And what better place if not the revolutionary decision to remove the children unfit parents? Come on, children deserve to be able to recognize the mistakes of their parents deserve to have the opportunity to break the vicious circle of power that binds them to their origins ( "Being the son of someone does not mean everything dovergli" , Alexander Berger). And, mind you I do not speak of having to be exemplary parents to raise a child (which, indeed, may be even harmful) but at least they are not unaware of the unfortunate and dangerous for the future and his humanity. Why They're not to encourage the adoption of practices that encourage independence and ideals of education of new generations, removing children from dangerous or unsuitable for families (as can be wealthy or not) to grow a citizen of the future? It 'clear that evolution requires a hard del proprio concetto di proprietà in quanto genitori, rendendosi perciò umilmente conto che il bambino non appartiene a se stessi ma è un patrimonio comune dell’intera umanità... ma pensate quanto sarebbe facile, tramite questi accorgimenti sociali nelle modalità di educazione dei figli, far passar di moda l’abitudine alla criminalità!
...Ovviamente, innumerevoli film hanno col tempo mostrato innumerevoli modi in cui le cose possono andare male (o molto male) in un sistema di questo genere. Ogni volta che si inserisce l'imperfetto controllo umano in un processo evolutivo, si toglie quell'imprevedibilità che permette alla natura di sistemare i problemi nel corso dei secoli, raggiungendo inaspettate situazioni di equilibrio (e quindi di progresso) anche dalle ipotesi più pessimistiche. Per cui è molto più probabile che l’umanità sia destinata a rimaner confinata nella sua solita secolare lentezza evolutiva, cadenzata dalla tradizione e dall’insensato incedere degli errori, tramandati alle future generazioni come patrimonio doveroso da preservare in nome di un inutile passato.
0 comments:
Post a Comment