the benefits of legalized abortion
I've been reading Stephen D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner's book Freakonomics. A particular passage strikes me as fascinating and I wanted to know what you out there think.
A bit of backstory. As you'll recall, crime and gang violence was paramount in the minds of all Americans in the early and mid 90s. Teenage violent offenders and violent ( Read more... )
A bit of backstory. As you'll recall, crime and gang violence was paramount in the minds of all Americans in the early and mid 90s. Teenage violent offenders and violent ( Read more... )
I do not agree with this.
The problem is also that it has been proven that unstable family lives breed criminals.
You confuse correlation with causality. No form of science, criminology including, offers proof. Proof is confined to systems, such as logic and mathematics, where the axioms are pre-defined.
How is religion not then eugenics? Religion emphasizes peace, tolerance, and compassion.
Eugenics is a social philosophy and/or a scientific movement to create "better" human beings by various interventions. Urging living people to better themselves is not the same.
Do you believe that if there was no religion then criminals would be deprived of their right to be violent?
You are begging the question. I do not believe that anyone has a "right" to be violent, at all.
Do you believe that criminals are born inherently violent and thus we need to have them in society because they have a right to exist?
No.
Do you believe that criminals exist in society to thin out the herd?
I believe that criminals exist because of various environmental and genetic causes. I do not, however, believe they exist to "thin out the herd" as it implies some manner of fatalism, which I do not subscribe to.
Reply
I do not agree with this.
What do you perceive human nature to be? Inherent what? Selfish? Good? Evil?
The problem is also that it has been proven that unstable family lives breed criminals.
You confuse correlation with causality. No form of science, criminology including, offers proof. Proof is confined to systems, such as logic and mathematics, where the axioms are pre-defined.
Agreed. Nothing has been proven. What do you think bad family lives produce?
How is religion not then eugenics? Religion emphasizes peace, tolerance, and compassion.
Eugenics is a social philosophy and/or a scientific movement to create "better" human beings by various interventions. Urging living people to better themselves is not the same.
I have a much more skeptical opinion of free will than you do. I see free will as having serious limitations. I see the excesses of religion rather than the benefits. I don't advocate making better human beings, per se, but I do believe in evolution of human society. I just don't think that doing it by current means is sufficient
Do you believe that if there was no religion then criminals would be deprived of their right to be violent?
Do you believe that religion has a moderating influence on violent behavior? Or none at all?
Do you believe that criminals are born inherently violent and thus we need to have them in society because they have a right to exist?
In your opinion, are criminals born or created?
Do you believe that criminals exist in society to thin out the herd?
I believe that criminals exist because of various environmental and genetic causes.
I do not, however, believe they exist to "thin out the herd" as it implies some manner of fatalism, which I do not subscribe to.
If criminal behavior exists, do you think it exists to serve any purpose? If not, then what?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment