Yes, I would kinda object to it on the grounds of the future is constantly changing. A simple action can affect things ten thousands miles away. Alltho I agree with shadowsalve the us gov is profiting off of people like us. Off the books tho lol
Re: Serious question for all By: faust Apr 12, 2009
Post # 4
I'm sorry to interfere as a non-psychic but as a law student I have to point out something.
This is a copy from Wikipedia (I could write this on my own but it's better this way because the text is flawless):
Cesare Lombroso, born Ezechia Marco Lombroso, was a Jewish-Italian criminologist and founder of the Italian School of Positivist Criminology. Lombroso rejected the established Classical School, which held that crime was a characteristic trait of human nature. Instead, using concepts drawn from physiognomy, early eugenics, psychiatry and Social Darwinism, Lombroso's theory of anthropological criminology essentially stated that criminality was inherited, and that someone "born criminal"' could be identified by physical defects, which confirmed a criminal as savage, or atavistic.
Re: Serious question for all By: kts Moderator / Adept Apr 12, 2009
Post # 5
This whole idea is a scary thought.
Fragile X syndrome and XXY syndrome may have a bit of science to back them up when they can state that people who suffer from them can have social and mental problems along with behavioral issues. Do we really want a world where people are punished for crimes they may commit in the future?
I hope that justice is served however only to those who have actually committed a crime in the past/present not the future. That is like punishing someone for having a thought or for them saying something others do not agree with.
Re: Serious question for all By: Nodrk Apr 12, 2009
Post # 6
This is actually a very interesting question.If we as a species evolve to ba point where we are able to see somones future with certainty,or at least the certainty that the criminal courts have today.
I can see it as a real possibility.
Morally I agree with Kts ,I hope we dont get to a point of passing judgement ,and convicting people for what we believe they are going to do.
I also like the comment posted by Faust,It to me brings up the debate over Nature or Nurture,but thats a different topic,lol
Well yea kts it may seem immoral but wouldn't the world seem a bit safer if there was one less idiot or siller killer? Idk mean maybe little cindy sue can walk down the street of new york feeling a bit safer. I'm all for not invaiding peoples privicay since I consider mind reading invaiding peoples privicay heck even empathy I consider it invasion of privaciy. However seeing into the future is not invasion of privacy unless its a intimite moment.
I am in agreement. If we get to the point that we punish people based on what we think they will do we will have past a point where we automatically judge people. And even God dares not presume to judge a man until hes dead. But on another note it would in a way make the world a little safer.
For those who havent seen the movie, Tom Cruise' character discovers a flaw in the system. When one of the three precogs disagrees with what the other two see only the coinciding visions are used to convict while the one that differs is stored inside the precog that predicted it. THis is called a minority report (hence the title of the movie).
So working based off that one has to remember the basic fundamental of chaos theory: A butterfly flapping its wings in New York can start a hurricane in Tokyo.
Re: Serious question for all By: kts Moderator / Adept Apr 13, 2009
Post # 11
I understand that people want to feel safe however there is a fine line between true danger and paranoia. Being the way that I am I can speak from years of experience that those who can see the future, read other thoughts, and have empathic tendencies are not perfect. These gifts can be helpful and hurtful at the same time.
All of these gifts are hard to control and many times can not be forced. That is why shielding is so very important for all to learn to do. Not only does a shield protect the person with the gift as they build it around them others with shields help to contain their energies. Trust me hearing another's thoughts can be to much information, seeing what they might do in their life is as well, and having empathic tendencies only allows you to feel their emotions. Therefor if a person is wearing their emotions on their sleeve as most people do it is not an invasion of privacy.
As for the morality of my thoughts, I do not think future crimes should be punished however I believe we can influence people from acting in a antisocial way. Capital punishment is one of them. Those who are convicted of crimes should be punished for them. Execution for those with murder, prison for those with manslaughter and made to work to better the community. Those convicted of rape or child molestation should be castrated or have their vagina sown shut. My list is much longer but I won't bore everyone.
Now back to the movie, it has been awhile for me but from what I remember the difference of opinion leads to Tom's character being arrested for a crime he might commit that he is set up for, so even the best systems have their flaws. In the end there will never be a perfect way to handle the sins of man and the gods need to be in total control of that weather it be through the actions of men, nature, or what happens after death.