Specificaly this form:
There is no way to equally judge another human being or bring back what the violation has caused equally. The attempt will lead to mistakes and cruelty. More insidious is the notion someone can bring justice. I bring this up because the smart men and women I know (asked 40) all agreed this is why they still believe in the religion they believe in. Some cited fear of death as number 2 but all said they believe there has to be justice from higher power ultimatey. And that this is the only solace they have in this world. They believe someone who took so much life, like a Dahmer, would have to be judged by something eternal. I said someone in war may take 100's of lives but this is judged justice because they did it under orders or for a "just" cause.
Justice does seem to be hard wired instinctual.Most social mammals show different degrees of abhorrents to inequality.Especially primates.
But essentially isn't the pursuit of real justice not possible? Calling it necessary means this will make those who deem the power to wield it, to better humanity, unjust from the beginning? Isn't justice another way of claiming superiority? Doesn't a despot in the world use it to claim there power? If we agree justice is not a noble pursuit and clearly impossible (like following the word of god), what laws or punishments should be changed or updated? How would you feel if a mass murder or child molester was treated with a kind hand, rather than the visceral feeling of gutting them like a pig and dancing in the entrails as they slowing die. I am the first to admit this sounds more like justice at a primal level. But should we be smarter than that?
is it possible to MAKE someone change
No, it's not always possible to MAKE someone change, but it's usually possible to positively influence them.
It took science a long time to make rockets work dependably enough, and we've heard the cliche about how difficult rocket science is. I'll bet human nature's even more complicated, but it's worth a lot more attention than we've historically given it.
yep i agree. Its harder than rocket science for sure and really I think the goal is to spread awareness to the victims that they are acting out of mental illness. I understand how crazy it feels being the passive victim. that is an obvious contraction from a diseased individual. And although the tools are not what they should be at least it's expected that the passive victim get and take and is given help. but even there we have work to do.
The nature of crime, punishment, and the various justice systems throughout the world will be dramatically changed within the next 20 years. Some of it has already happened.
Criminal activity can certainly be driven by psychological issues, as well as addiction issues, which can be related. But much of the acceptance of criminal activity by those outside of those two communities (wrong word, but can't think of a better one) has been driven by economics.
Muggings and carjackings and many other forms of crime are now things of the past due much to technology like Lojack and the adoption of credit cards and debit cards. Many criminals were brought into a network of already "successful" criminals. They were successful because back in 1970, a businessman out on the town might have $1,000 in his pocket available to steal. That was common, now it is quite rare. A carjacker could successfully drive away and have zero circumstances, now he/she could expose their entire enterprise and all associates if they accidentally take the wrong car.
My house was robbed in 2011, and the perp is in jail now along with all of his accomplices (there was a crime spree in my neighborhood 12 houses in 2 weeks). They were caught be a simple combination of security cameras in the neighborhood, a website named I-Neighbors which is like a mini-facebook for neighborhoods, as well as fingerprints, and other traditional crime detection methods.
Other economics drove their choices, the TV I bought for $800 is available on e-bay for $70. That's why they had to hit as many houses as they did. My 'hood and house haven't got much in the jewelry department, but the places in the suburbs have alarms on everything. It just doesn't make sense to be a burglar anymore. Plumbers make more money and don't risk their lifestyle. Netflix eliminates the need for DVD's, Cloud computing makes computers less valuable.
Add this to the fact that cameras are almost everywhere now, and in 20 years can absolutely be assumed to be everywhere (some of them smart, with face-matching technology). The criminal industry is another dying American industry, like manufacturing.
Ok, so less criminals. Now we can focus on more real criminals, how they get the way they get, and how to change their outcomes. Justice? Maybe there will be a different word for it. Correction, but actual rather than figurative.
Very good points!! I had seen some statistics to that effect but the personal experience to me speaks volumes to the growing reality. We can get into privacy issue in another post someday:)
If someone steals my cell phone, I can lock it up or even wipe it from my desktop machine or my tablet. That's if I don't use GPS to tell the cops where it is.
If a robber stops me and demands my cell phone, I'll just toss it in one direction and run in the other direction. Chances are, he'll go for the phone only to discover it's passworded.
You're right. Fewer transactions require money and we'll be carrying even less money in the future. We are starting to be able to make purchases using our cell phones,
I'm a lot more worried about cyber criminals than street criminals. Ones who can shut down a power grid or water supply or cause a nuclear power plant to go Fukushima.
Requires a lot of work to understand how to do those things and then even more work to manage the people who would do those things. I do think it makes a powerful world govt more of a likelyhood no matter how fierce the opposition. Because it doesn't have to have approval by the people to exist.
I saw the future of convenience retailing about 10 years ago. Visiting a friend in Brooklyn NYC, we went to a local convenience store. We were in a glassed-in room. We pointed to what we wanted and the clerk gathered it. We payed through a sliding drawer under a part of the window, and our goods were delivered through a larger sliding door under that one. At no point were the goods available until they were paid for.
But is the flash mob more a fear for the govt's of the world. Imagine how much braver an activit can be if they can meet in private and show up in mass. Seems like it topples hardline regimes in the world already.
Knowing TED, this will probably be good.