Philosophy Discussion Forums

Belindi wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 1:42 pm
While it's true that it's not a simple matter to establish the psychological causes of crimes , that is what decent people have to do so that both justice and effectiveness may be best served.

No "cause" has ever been established for any crime by any criminal --- because criminal behaviors, nor any other behaviors, do not have "causes." They have motives. I don't think you understood what I said regarding what must be the case for A to be deemed the cause of B. That condition is never satisfied for any alleged "cause" of some particular behavior.

I suspect that you yourself may lack psychological expertise.

There is precious little expertise to be had in that field. It is a chaotic discipline with no accepted organizing theory and with a multiplicity of "schools" proffering their candidates for that role --- none of which can reliably predict individual human behavior.

The concept of cause and effect is only applicable to deterministic systems. Human behavior is non-deterministic. In their efforts to appear "scientific" psychologists invoke an explanatory construct, cause and effect, inapplicable to their subject matter.

Belindi wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 1:42 pm

GE Morton wrote: ↑September 27th, 2018, 10:24 pm

You may be equating correlation with causation. In any case, human behavior does not have causes in the sense of "cause" understood in the sciences. In physics and other sciences, for A to be a cause of B, B must always follow A, ceteris paribus. E.g., if a hydrogen and oxygen mixture is heated to a certain temperature the mixture will always ignite, forming water vapor. Raising the temperature of that mixture (by, say, tossing a lighted match into it) is the cause of the resulting fire.

For anything A to be considered a cause of B, it must be possible to predict B, given A, with a high degree of confidence.

There is no human behavior that reliably and predictably follows from any alleged "cause." For example, while being abused or neglected as a child, or being raised by a poor, single parent in a "bad" neighborhood, or attending a poor school, etc., may be correlated with criminal behavior, they cannot be causes of that behavior --- simply because thousands of other people with similar background factors do not become criminals.



That last sentence is true. But many who had no greater opportunities do not become criminals. Hence that difference in opportunities cannot be the cause of the criminal behavior.

While it's true that it's not a simple matter to establish the psychological causes of crimes , that is what decent people have to do so that both justice and effectiveness may be best served. I suspect that you yourself may lack psychological expertise.

Crime can be the best solution to a limited set of options.
Good criminals weigh the benefits of crime against their current situation, and against the slim chance of being caught. Those that they steal from weigh the chance of getting robbed with the cost of property insurance.
Bad criminals get caught. But that is precious view.
For the most part people who turn to crime do not feel part of the society that ultimately attempts to judge them.

It is no coincidence that societies that care for their people the most tend to have less criminals.

error above "view" = few.

ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 3:58 pm
Crime can be the best solution to a limited set of options.

All choices, by everyone, are always from a limited set of options. Moreover, many of limits are placed by the agent himself, by choices previously made, or because some possible options are ruled out by him because they are incompatible with various preferences, interests, and beliefs he holds.

Good criminals weigh the benefits of crime against their current situation, and against the slim chance of being caught.

Yes, they do. Those calculations are not necessarily accurate, but they are indeed made.

For the most part people who turn to crime do not feel part of the society that ultimately attempts to judge them.

That is true too. It is also true of many who do not commit crimes, but who instead complain of "alienation," "marginalization," "social injustice," and agitate for political "reforms" to make society more egalitarian. That anomie, or feeling of estrangement, is an atavism: a psychological reaction to the loss of solidarity and and intimacy resulting from the transformation from tribal to civilized social structures 10,000 years ago. Civilized societies, unlike kinship-based tribal societies, are societies of strangers --- societies whose members have no natural bonds, no shared personal histories, no common interests, no overriding concern for one another's welfare, and no a priori obligations to one another.

It is no coincidence that societies that care for their people the most tend to have less criminals.

No need to steal if the State is doing it for you.

Morton -

You’ll have to expand on “No need to steal if the state is doign it for you.” You know this so don’t leave it hanging.

You’ll have to expand on “No need to steal if the state is doign it for you.” You know this so don’t leave it hanging.

If you've ever read any of GE Morton's views before, it's obvious what he means. He means that taxation to fund public services, such as welfare services that might reduce the incidence of acquisitive crime, is a form of theft. He is a believer in small government and leaving people alone so long as they do not harm others. Sometimes known as Libertarianism, I believe.

We need prisons to keep individuals like violent psychopaths and known sexual predators (like rapists and paedophiles) off the streets; i.e. individuals with incurable, untreatable psychiatric disorders which cause them to behave in ways that inflict material harm/suffering ( physical/psychological on other persons and their families).

Regards

Dachshund

GE Morton wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 7:19 pm No need to steal if the State is doing it for you.

What is property; property is theft.

Burning ghost wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 9:03 pm Morton -

You’ll have to expand on “No need to steal if the state is doign it for you.” You know this so don’t leave it hanging.

He neglects to realise that people with money are the biggest thieves.

The greatest crime of capitalism is the ability it gives for those with money to make more money without doing any work. This is theft on a grand scale. Morton prefers to blame the poor and the people that create the wealth through labour.

GE Morton wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 2:39 pm

Belindi wrote: ↑September 28th, 2018, 1:42 pm
While it's true that it's not a simple matter to establish the psychological causes of crimes , that is what decent people have to do so that both justice and effectiveness may be best served.

No "cause" has ever been established for any crime by any criminal --- because criminal behaviors, nor any other behaviors, do not have "causes." They have motives. I don't think you understood what I said regarding what must be the case for A to be deemed the cause of B. That condition is never satisfied for any alleged "cause" of some particular behavior.

I suspect that you yourself may lack psychological expertise.

There is precious little expertise to be had in that field. It is a chaotic discipline with no accepted organizing theory and with a multiplicity of "schools" proffering their candidates for that role --- none of which can reliably predict individual human behavior.

The concept of cause and effect is only applicable to deterministic systems. Human behavior is non-deterministic. In their efforts to appear "scientific" psychologists invoke an explanatory construct, cause and effect, inapplicable to their subject matter.

GEMorton, I do believe that the grapes of psychology are sour for you. Indeed and there is no ideal way to predict human behaviour however those predictions which result from knowledge and critical reflection are better than emotional reactions.

Motives are a subsection of causes. The process of rehabilitation includes motivating the subject. Clearly you are not an educationist.

ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 4:49 am
The greatest crime of capitalism is the ability it gives for those with money to make more money without doing any work. This is theft on a grand scale.

Really? Well, let's see . . . Bill Gates, while a college student, wrote a version of BASIC that would run on the "microcomputers" using the Intel 8080 CPU chip that had begun appearing on the market. Since no other software for those machines yet existed, many of the manufacturers of those machines began bundling "Micro-soft BASIC" with their computers, enabling buyers to write their own software. Gates made a lot of money. From whom did he steal it?

With that money he hired other programmers and began developing other software. Gates made even more money, and since part of their compensation was Microsoft stock over 12,000 of those employees became millionaires (and 3 billionaires). From whom did Gates steal that money?

Morton prefers to blame the poor and the people that create the wealth through labour.

Ah, I see the problem --- you're still enamoured of Marx's silly "labor theory of value." You might try studying some real economics.

Belindi wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 11:40 am
GEMorton, I do believe that the grapes of psychology are sour for you. Indeed and there is no ideal way to predict human behaviour . . .

There is no reliable way to predict human behavior, even a less-than-ideal one. Since there is not, one cannot sensibly speak of "causes" of that behavior.

. . . however those predictions which result from knowledge and critical reflection are better than emotional reactions.

No amount of theoretical knowledge or reflection will allow Alfie to predict Bruno's behavior. It is possible, of course, for someone who knows Bruno well to predict his behavior in some situations. E.g., his wife can probably predict what he be doing next Sunday morning (watching a football game). But that is not a theoretical prediction; it is simply a projection from previously observed behavior.

Motives are a subsection of causes.

Oh, no. Motives are internal to the agent; causes are external factors forcing or triggering an event. Motives are supplied by the agent's interests --- his goals, preferences, tastes, and desires, all of which are sui generis, idiosyncratic, non-rational* and unpredictable.

*Some interests are instrumental --- "means goods," i.e., things desired because they are necessary or useful to obtaining something else. Those are (or can be) rational. "End goods" --- things desired "for their own sake" are non-rational.

GE Morton wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 1:13 pm

ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 4:49 am
The greatest crime of capitalism is the ability it gives for those with money to make more money without doing any work. This is theft on a grand scale.

Really? Well, let's see . . . Bill Gates, while a college student, wrote a version of BASIC that would run on the "microcomputers" using the Intel 8080 CPU chip that had begun appearing on the market. Since no other software for those machines yet existed, many of the manufacturers of those machines began bundling "Micro-soft BASIC" with their computers, enabling buyers to write their own software. Gates made a lot of money. From whom did he steal it?

LOL.
Microsoft as the paragon of capitalism!
never heard of the evils of monopoly obviously.

ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 3:40 pm
LOL.
Microsoft as the paragon of capitalism!
never heard of the evils of monopoly obviously.

Didn't answer the question, I see. Again --- from whom did he steal?

GE Morton wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 3:44 pm

ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 29th, 2018, 3:40 pm
LOL.
Microsoft as the paragon of capitalism!
never heard of the evils of monopoly obviously.

Didn't answer the question, I see. Again --- from whom did he steal?

Gates basically did **** all. Teams of underpaid people, tax evasion technicians, victims chained to crap software and crashing operating systems tearing their hair out, all paid through the nose to this parasite.