Author Topic: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct  (Read 12155 times)

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #200 on: January 26, 2023, 02:16:14 PM »
Bosco1,
Do you disagree with the following statement?
Circumstances and situations do not determine or define human action in response to them, however human action is almost always shaped, impacted, and influenced by circumstances and situations.

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,000
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #201 on: January 26, 2023, 02:31:45 PM »
I live in KY. One can conceal carry here without any sort of permit. I have tons of guns and ammo. However, way out here in the country, where I live, there is no need to carry a gun!

Okay then, as long as you have a wheelbarrow.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,397
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #202 on: January 26, 2023, 02:46:15 PM »
The impressive of this thread is that Bosco1 took a thesis that falls squarely into the "No *expletive deleted*it, Sherlock" category (The law does not determine human actions)

Yes, I have been wondering who Sartre (or Bosco) is supposed to be arguing with, on that point.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #203 on: January 26, 2023, 02:49:50 PM »
No ... that does support the initial claim that everyone agrees with to some extent - i.e. that law does not perfectly dictate human action.

It does not address the following assertions:
Do you disagree with the following statement?
Circumstances and situations do not determine or define human action in response to them, however human action is almost always shaped, impacted, and influenced by circumstances and situations.
Sure I  agree with that.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,397
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #204 on: January 26, 2023, 02:53:38 PM »
 The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #205 on: January 26, 2023, 02:54:09 PM »
What part of Ky? I'm in Ky too.
Lebanon in Marion County. Moved here from CA twelve years ago and have twelve acres. Marion County is in the center of the state.
Where are you?

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #206 on: January 26, 2023, 02:55:31 PM »
Sure I  agree with that.
Awesome.

So given that, what is your argument against law?

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #207 on: January 26, 2023, 03:07:10 PM »
The impressive of this thread is that Bosco1 took a thesis that falls squarely into the "No *expletive deleted*it, Sherlock" category (The law does not determine human actions), and managed through heretofore rarely seen levels of obtuse writing to get us to spend 7 odd pages discussing a blindingly obvious premise.
Now many members are agreeing that law is not determinative of human action. Nonetheless, you have never ever heard anyone but me make that claim! Have you!?

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #208 on: January 26, 2023, 03:11:42 PM »
Now many members are agreeing that law is not determinative of human action. Nonetheless, you have never ever heard anyone but me make that claim! Have you!?
Do you really believe you are the first person ever to remark that laws are not followed perfectly?   :O

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #209 on: January 26, 2023, 03:12:02 PM »
Now many members are agreeing that law is not determinative of human action. Nonetheless, you have never ever heard anyone but me make that claim! Have you!?

What? you believe you have uncovered an immutable truth for the ages?
Kind of akin to pronouncing that the sky is blue, grass is green and water is wet.
You sir are an absolute genius.

 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #210 on: January 26, 2023, 03:16:13 PM »
Awesome.

So given that, what is your argument against law?
What I am against regarding law is that the persons who mediate and make law, legislators; judges; police, punish persons for not being determined to action or inaction by law, while all the while, law is not, cannot be, determinative/originative of human action, which is precisely what legislators; judges; and police believe, i.e., that language of law is determinative/originative of their actions and, of human actions.  Thus we live in a world running on the basis that law is a determinative of human conduct, which is entirely mistaken!

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #211 on: January 26, 2023, 03:21:15 PM »
Do you really believe you are the first person ever to remark that laws are not followed perfectly?   :O
That is not what I am saying, i.e., that laws are not followed perfectly.  I am the first to clearly state that law is not determinative/originative of human action, and, to support my position with the thought of an internationally renowned scholar, J.P. Sartre.

Nick1911

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,492
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #212 on: January 26, 2023, 03:33:06 PM »
That is not what I am saying, i.e., that laws are not followed perfectly.  I am the first to clearly state that law is not determinative/originative of human action, and, to support my position with the thought of an internationally renowned scholar, J.P. Sartre.

If this is you communicating clearly, I'd hate to see unclear communication!

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #213 on: January 26, 2023, 03:38:17 PM »
If this is you communicating clearly, I'd hate to see unclear communication!
Yes, this is me communicating clearly.  Sure you hate to see unclear statements...

It is not very clear what you are trying to say with that obtuse statement.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #214 on: January 26, 2023, 03:39:38 PM »
What I am against regarding law is that the persons who mediate and make law, legislators; judges; police, punish persons for not being determined to action or inaction by law, while all the while, law is not, cannot be, determinative/originative of human action, which is precisely what legislators; judges; and police believe, i.e., that language of law is determinative/originative of their actions and, of human actions.  Thus we live in a world running on the basis that law is a determinative of human conduct, which is entirely mistaken!
Law is not punishing people for failing to be possessed by law like automatons.  Law is the way a group of people puts teeth to their axiological conclusions.  It is transactional.  If you cross this line we will do bad things to you - so don't cross that line.

I am the first to clearly state that law is not determinative/originative of human action
Do you believe that punishing someone for violating a law is saying that the law is determinative/originative of human action?

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #215 on: January 26, 2023, 03:56:33 PM »
Law is not punishing people for failing to be possessed by law like automatons.  Law is the way a group of people puts teeth to their axiological conclusions.  It is transactional.  If you cross this line we will do bad things to you - so don't cross that line.
Do you believe that punishing someone for violating a law is saying that the law is determinative/originative of human action?
The person(s) punishing another person purportedly by law, for a violation of law, deems law to be determinative, and, yes, punishing someone is, in error, saying that law is determinative of human action; while, all the while, law is not and cannot possibly be determinative of human conduct...Thus, extant law is an ugly and screwed-up mess of dire ontological error.

WLJ

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 28,262
  • On Patrol In The Epsilon Eridani System
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #216 on: January 26, 2023, 04:10:53 PM »
Lebanon in Marion County. Moved here from CA twelve years ago and have twelve acres. Marion County is in the center of the state.
Where are you?

Louisville

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us".
- Calvin and Hobbes

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #217 on: January 26, 2023, 04:17:31 PM »
The person(s) punishing another person purportedly by law, for a violation of law, deems law to be determinative, and, yes, punishing someone is, in error, saying that law is determinative of human action; while, all the while, law is not and cannot possibly be determinative of human conduct...Thus, extant law is an ugly and screwed-up mess of dire ontological error.
Under what conditions in your mind can punishment ever be justly meted out?

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #218 on: January 26, 2023, 04:19:19 PM »
Louisville
Wow, the big city.  I was there for the first time recently. Very big. Very bustling. All these larger towns in KY are brand spanking new looking, with businesses booming everywhere in beautiful new buildings.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,734
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #219 on: January 26, 2023, 04:24:45 PM »
The idea of a govt being a necessary evil intended to control the vices/immoral conduct of man is not a new concept.  I can't remember if I ever read all of Thomas Paign's Common Sense, but this paragraph below was at the beginning.  He didn't invent the idea.  That was all part of the debate around the founding of this country. 

Quote
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a Government, which we might expect in a country without Government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other law-giver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expence and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #220 on: January 26, 2023, 04:27:13 PM »
Under what conditions in your mind can punishment ever be justly meted out?
I do agree that punishment does need to be done, like for all this recent mass murder.

At this point it would be best if all our inauthoritative authorities were to be honest, and say that they agree that they are not in fact being determined by law when punishing someone; then, we could proceed in honesty by simply saying that it is the will of the majority that mass murderers be put to death...

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,397
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #221 on: January 26, 2023, 04:28:07 PM »
Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are oversocialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,397
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #222 on: January 26, 2023, 04:31:17 PM »
Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy...

Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.

Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.

Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.

Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Bosco1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #223 on: January 26, 2023, 04:31:26 PM »
The idea of a govt being a necessary evil intended to control the vices/immoral conduct of man is not a new concept.  I can't remember if I ever read all of Thomas Paign's Common Sense, but this paragraph below was at the beginning.  He didn't invent the idea.  That was all part of the debate around the founding of this country.
Wow 94 that is a fantastic Paine piece.  Thanks a million.

cordex

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,623
Re: “Law” is Not Determinative of Conduct
« Reply #224 on: January 26, 2023, 04:35:05 PM »
I do agree that punishment does need to be done, like for all this recent mass murder.

At this point it would be best if all our inauthoritative authorities were to be honest, and say that they agree that they are not in fact being determined by law when punishing someone; then, we could proceed in honesty by simply saying that it is the will of the majority that mass murderers be put to death...
So you don't have an issue with people being punished under the law, you just have an issue with how the enforcers of the law phrase it?

According to your interpretation of things, wouldn't any punishment for violating any code (mass murder or otherwise) be equally punishing people for human action not being determined by whatever code was violated?